What we appear to have here is a typical politician who can come down firmly on both sides of an issue but ultimately votes for the appearance of populism. So what else is new?
To each according to his need, from each according to his ability. Is that how it goes?
If the defendant who is responsible can\’t compensate the plaintiff, take the money from a richer defendant. We can\’t have individual “victims” going without so we make victims of the company. If the defendant that\’s 90% responsible can\’t pay, why should the defendant that\’s 10% responsible pay 100% of the judgment?
Each defendant should pay the portion of the judgment according to their portion of liability. If one can’t pay, the plaintiff is out of luck for that part of the judgement.
One more question. If there\’s no defendant that can cover the judgement, who should pay? The state?
1) 200 year old laws have been around and time tested, therfore should not be changed?
2) Communism does not try to redistribute wealth?
3) The redistibution of wealth is OK as long as it is done in a court of law?
4) I\’m a lawyer and have to make a living too?
What we appear to have here is a typical politician who can come down firmly on both sides of an issue but ultimately votes for the appearance of populism. So what else is new?
To each according to his need, from each according to his ability. Is that how it goes?
If the defendant who is responsible can\’t compensate the plaintiff, take the money from a richer defendant. We can\’t have individual “victims” going without so we make victims of the company. If the defendant that\’s 90% responsible can\’t pay, why should the defendant that\’s 10% responsible pay 100% of the judgment?
Each defendant should pay the portion of the judgment according to their portion of liability. If one can’t pay, the plaintiff is out of luck for that part of the judgement.
One more question. If there\’s no defendant that can cover the judgement, who should pay? The state?
Comrade, you have much to learn. The state never pays, only collects.
Vlad
Indeed. They would take from you and me to pay Yuri Victim.
\”200-year-old joint and several liability doctrine.\”
Nice try anachronistically tying up American tort law to Marxism.
So, comrade Ron, what is your point?
1) 200 year old laws have been around and time tested, therfore should not be changed?
2) Communism does not try to redistribute wealth?
3) The redistibution of wealth is OK as long as it is done in a court of law?
4) I\’m a lawyer and have to make a living too?
Vlad
Thanks for the thread Hancock