Insurer Association Urges Veto of Calif. Punitive Damages Bill

September 18, 2006

  • September 18, 2006 at 12:57 pm
    ben says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    meaning lawyers will have less incentive to seek punitivate damages because they are now getting 33% of 25%, i.e. 8%?

    It seems that there are a lot of cases that are only tried because lawyers think they\’ll get a huge contingency off the punitive damages (while the actual damages are small.)

    With this law, less of these (sometimes frivolous) lawsuits would be filed.

  • September 18, 2006 at 1:04 am
    Umpiire says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    While there is a much better solution, this idea has some merit, and I\’m shocked Insurance Industry people would oppose it.

    The real solution is to send Punitive Damages Awards to THE government unit that serves for the oversight of THAT infringement. The more that business messes up, the more they then fund THEIR TARGET regulatory watchdogs, so they don\’t do that same bad thing again. THAT is a good \”punishment\”.

    Punitive Damages should NEVER go to the plaintiff, and should NEVER go to the attorney — we\’re punishing the defendant, not lining the pockets of those that brought the suit! The general damages are what makes the plaintiff whole — and that\’s all they get!

    But having punitive damages go to a general fund is a GREAT start — as long as the plaintiff and their lawyer don\’t get a dime of it. The moment you stop these windfalls, you\’ll remove the \”lottery\” from our court system, and people will sue for their damages, and not with thoughts of getting rich on punitive damages awards that should have NEVER belonged to that single person, but should be applied to SOCIETY as a whole!

    Then, if we could just get rid of lawyer contingency fees… we\’d have it made! Of course… if the lawyer spent 30% of their time in the hospital in pain from that accident… then I\’d be OK with letting them have 30% of the award for that pain and suffering value! The lawyer should get their hourly rate for their professional service. If they win, they get paid. If they lose, they have to decide if they bill their client, or if they waive their fee. If they know what the heck they are doing, and their hourly rate includes the business risk of losing cases occasionally, then there is no reason to only take cases based on the cash value… they should take cases based on the MERITS of the case, and there should be NO other influence for them — unless, again, they are sitting in the hospital bed with a broken leg or ruptured disc… THEN they can get paid on a percent of the pain and suffering they shared with their client!

    Come on… this movement is a VICTORY compared to what we have now! Let the General Fund have the money, with NO loss going to plaintiff and attorney, and see how quickly Punitive Damages award numbers and values drop off the table, because the plaintiffs nor lawyers can get rich off the \”lottery\” system!

  • September 18, 2006 at 1:04 am
    realist not a fool like you! says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    OK if you run you might just catch back up to the turnip truck. The lawyers will get their cut before the state my friend —otherwise the trial bar would have not only opposed it but sumarily defeated it before it got this far.

  • September 18, 2006 at 3:34 am
    ersaco says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    No matter how you slice it, this just another “tax”. The government now gets the money..yahoo they know how to spend it?, we all pay more for goods and services due to the punitive damages surcharge…. and jobs go to China where they can make faulty products and not incur this cost.

    It never ceases to amaze me how greedy and short sited the Calf politicians are.

    The Calf. deserve what they voted in!

  • September 18, 2006 at 4:17 am
    bob laublaw says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    No, it isn\’t another tax and you obviously not do comprehend (at all) what is trying to be done. perhaps (your) ignorance is bliss…

  • September 19, 2006 at 9:22 am
    ML says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I for one am glad there was a lawyer who took our case against big insurance on a contingency basis. Who can afford fees? The contingency deal isn\’t as you presented- he gets nothing if you do not win. On a fee basis you pay up front and all along the way. You don\’t get a refund if you lose. Unless you are very wealthy, we need attorneys who will accept cases on contingency basis. Sure some chase ambulances, but attorneys are not going to waste their time on frivolous no win suits if they are on a contingency. It\’s the fee guys that bill you by the minute and fractions thereof

  • September 20, 2006 at 9:26 am
    realist again says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Bob is obviously a pond scum trail lawyer or worse a career government employee. Either way he must live with the knowledge he has never produced a single beneficial thing for society but sucks our tax paying dollars out of each of us in the name of progress and the protection of the innocent victims of capitalism like a tick on legless dog. Ignore his poor english too as he is obviously an example of the wonderful California public education system.

  • September 22, 2006 at 2:37 am
    bob laublaw says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Wrong, wrong and wrong. Man you are one stupid f*ck. Most people with intelligence understand the meaning of my \”name\”. Please obtain your GED.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*