Subj : Re: Um...no comment?
To   : Frank Reid
From : Finnigann
Date : Sun Sep 18 2005 01:07 am

-=> Frank Reid wrote to Deuce <=-

 FR>   Re: Re: Um...no comment?
 FR>   By: Deuce to Finnigann on Sat Sep 17 2005 20:07:00

 > In that case, the guy would end up with $155mil for his lost finger (or
 > whatever) not because HE desereved it for what he went through, but because
 > deserved to pay it for putting him through it.

 FR> I would agree, in principle, if those punitive awards were:

 FR> a) Not distributed primarily to lawyers, and

 FR> b) Not immediately factored back into operating costs and levied
 FR> against the consumer.

 FR> With these astronomical punitive awards, we are only increasing the
 FR> costs of products to the consumer.  This is particularly true with
 FR> medical care -- it's not like we can boycott health services!

 FR> We need caps on these damages, and the entire cost of business will go
 FR> down. It shouldn't cost $5 for a Band-Aid in the emergency room!

The medical field is a differnt situation. It's not an assembly line operation
(pardon the pun) I think the medical revue board should step in and see if in
fact the doctor is really up to the standard we like to think our doctors
attain. If *they* don't, litigation is the only recourse availible to a
patient. I don't recall punitive awards for patient care, but I could just be
forgetting them. Although you may clasify 'Pain and Suffering' as punitive...

Manufacturers are a different case and shouuld fall under different rules. If
they knowingly produce faulty products then it should be a percentage of their
proffits awarded. Not every lawsuit would be of this kind. But flagrant and
continued violations should cost something a bit more. Even to the point of
closing the business down.

.... Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.46
 þ Synchronet þ Bits-N-Bytes BBS    Onehellofa BBS     bnb.dtdns.net

.