Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by islstl, Jan 6, 2005.
We just need better balance between outrageous jury awards and the public's right to be protected from incompetent professionals and corporations.
Both goals are equally important and and are not mutually exclusive. Without proper equilibruium, the lawyers end up with the bulk of the money. In such cases, neither party is served well and the money is spent where it adds nothing to national productivity.
So you agree this idiot should not see the light of day in a courtroom?
"In a brief telephone interview with Reuters, Aitken said, 'I am not at liberty to discuss the complaint unless it is a paid-interview situation.' "
Wow, this idiot doesn't even make a pretense of what his motivation is. If I'm the judge, this alone is all I need to hear to dismiss the suit, and if I could impose legal sanctions on the plaintiff for even attempting to pull this off, I would.
That poor idiot, he'll get his day in court.
Every judge needs to be able to once in a while, without fear of review or censure, be able to bang the gavel and say...."Get that sh!t outta here."
:hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi:
Well, everybody deserves to have his issue heard in court. They must be heard in a democracy, but not necessarily acted upon. Judges dismiss frivolous cases all of the time, sometimes remarkably quickly.
In some circumstances, a person can be charged with a misdemeanor for filing a frivolous lawsuit. There should be more penalties, including stiff fines, for filing a frivolous lawsuit and wasting the court's time. And it should include all of the lawyers representing the case.