Negligence, Other Injury Tort reform & Frivolous Lawsuits

[Redemptionman]

With a larger number of states joining tort reform and lobbying by insurance companies to cap overall damages, what is the overall opinion of these initiatives for example. Texas is but one example where damages are capped at 250k regardless of outcome including up to wrongful death. Tennessee is another one that has capped damages in order to limit plaintiff's/ victims from recovering actual damages.

What does the future hold? Medical providers typically work with the insurance companies to limit and reduce plaintiff's damages as well. Is it a case of a large amount of frivolous lawsuits getting pay days and bad apples bringing the system down. Is it a case of, in order to control rising insurance rates it is a strategy by the companies to limit damages and protect overall society?

By limiting and throwing out frivolous lawsuits this can help unclog the system and more attorneys are using alternate means than filing a lawsuit to settle smaller claims.

 

[adjusterjack]

I suggest you study up on the history of tort reform in the United States before we get into any lengthy discussion. It's not a new concept and has never really been completely successful.

history of tort reform in the US at DuckDuckGo

 

[zddoodah]

You should also read carefully. Damages caps typically apply ONLY to non-economic damages. If you don't know the difference between economic and non-economic damages, you cannot have an intelligent discussion on this topic.

 

[Redemptionman]

You should also read carefully. Damages caps typically apply ONLY to non-economic damages. If you don't know the difference between economic and non-economic damages, you cannot have an intelligent discussion on this topic.

Gee, it still caps what a person can get in the pain and suffering realm, It keeps honest victims of negligence cases from recouping all the monies which they deserve while preserving the profitability of business that run lobbying for tort reform. It is not only a corrupt system, it is also allows publicly traded insurance companies to skate the laws and not pay claims in a timely fashion. It is a system that doesn't have an issue to begin with but had become one through various limits to victims to recoup monies from damages.

 

[Zigner]

Gee, it still caps what a person can get in the pain and suffering realm,

Do you know what "non-economic damages" are?

...various limits to victims to recoup monies from damages.

No, it doesn't cap what can be "recouped" for actual damages.

 

[Redemptionman]

Do you know what "non-economic damages" are?
No, it doesn't cap what can be "recouped" for actual damages.

I do but I am not sure you do.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I do but I am not sure you do.

You clearly don't.

 

[Redemptionman]

You clearly don't.

I know you don't either, so defend your bro in charge, for some reason in your minds pain and suffering is not non economic. Gosh the trolls that post on this board for so many years do not know anything for what they post and I feel sorry for anyone taking their advice.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I know you don't either, so defend your bro in charge, for some reason in your minds pain and suffering is not non economic. Gosh the trolls that post on this board for so many years do not know anything for what they post and I feel sorry for anyone taking their advice.

I hate your double negative there is it confusing.

If I hit your car with mine the cost of the damage to the car, any medical bills, and other actual costs associated with the accident are economic damages. The fact that you are now scared to go outside after the accident is non-economic damage.

 

[Redemptionman]

I hate your double negative there is it confusing.

If I hit your car with mine the cost of the damage to the car, any medical bills, and other actual costs associated with the accident are economic damages. The fact that you are now scared to go outside after the accident is non-economic damage.

Seriously, okay. LOL

What about the pain associated with missing a limb or being confined to a wheel chair the rest of your life. If you need someone to feed and dress you because you can not do that yourself?

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Seriously, okay. LOL

So what are your definitions?

 

[Redemptionman]

So what are your definitions?

Its not just economic its life care planning as well, not because you are scared to go out at night. Of course unless you feel someone should lose their lively hood due to someone else's negligence. Have to go on welfare with all the trimmings because they were capped at 250k and can not work jobs any longer.

 

[zddoodah]

It keeps honest victims of negligence cases from recouping all the monies which they deserve

Who's to say what "they deserve"? It's not as though there's some cosmic decree that says what a victim of negligence "deserves," so it's the law that determines what a person. In this case, the law says "they deserve" no more than whatever the cap is.

It is not only a corrupt system

Oh, just stop.

it is also allows publicly traded insurance companies to skate the laws and not pay claims in a timely fashion.

Skate which laws? I can assure you that insurance companies are held accountable if they don't pay valid claims in a timely fashion.

for some reason in your minds pain and suffering is not non economic.

It has nothing to do with "[our] minds," and this statement demonstrates clearly you don't know what you're talking about. As I said before, if you don't understand the difference between economic and non-economic damages, you can't have an intelligent discussion about this subject. That you don't like the distinction doesn't mean it doesn't exist under the laws of every state.

 

[Redemptionman]

Whose to say what "they deserve"? It's not as though there's some cosmic decree that says what a victim of negligence "deserves," so it's the law that determines what a person. In this case, the law says "they deserve" no more than whatever the cap is.



Oh, just stop.



Skate which laws? I can assure you that insurance companies are held accountable if they don't pay valid claims in a timely fashion.



It has nothing to do with "[our] minds," and this statement demonstrates clearly you don't know what you're talking about. As I said before, if you don't understand the difference between economic and non-economic damages, you can't have an intelligent discussion about this subject. That you don't like the distinction doesn't mean it doesn't exist under the laws of every state.

seek help and a refund from whatever college you might have attended if they offer it.

 

[zddoodah]

seek help and a refund from whatever college you might have attended if they offer it.

Please go engage in self-copulation with sharp objects. What made you into the asshole you are? I'm done with your nonsense.

 

[Redemptionman]

Please go engage in self-copulation with sharp objects. What made you into the asshole you are? I'm done with your nonsense.

Your right I am wrong, economic damages include long term and short medical costs and future lost earnings.

Pain and suffering is a damage that is included in non-economic costs. However, I am not sure all states include LCP into those figures.

I got confused on different state laws, Texas for example caps medical malpractice economic and non-economic damages a like and protects the hospitals from tort exposure. This still limits individuals ability to get compensated for their injuries. You are basically barring the court room door steps.

 

[cbg]

Okay. That's it.