Please elaborate. Do you mean lawyers should work for free? Are you arguing against contingency fees? Or are you just spouting off ignorance?
Well, maybed if jury duty didn’t screw someone’s life over beyond repair then I would agree with you. I think jury duty should pay the loss of wages that you will have to accept by not making it in to work. If you are paid 100 dollars an hour, then jury duty should in fact pay you 100 dollars an hour.
My view on it is, I will never be judged by a jury of my peers, because if they were MY peers they wouldn’t be serving on a jury.
Erek
Yeeesh!
Lawsuit mania does not exist. Or if it does, please prove it rather than merely asserting it. Have the number of lawsuits per 100,000 in population increased over time. My WAG is just the opposite.
Punitive damages are only awardable when the party seeking them is able to prove real damages and then that they were cause by malice, oppression and despicable conduct. It must ordinarily be proven by a higher standard than a regular civil case, and then must be proven to the same jury in a separate phase of the trial after they have already awarded compensatory damages, so they are less likely to award further damages.
Punitive damages, when they are awarded against a corporation, are the only type of punishment the corporation is likely to face as no corporation has ever gone to prison for activity that would be criminal. This is done by a jury citizens who would rather be somewhere else.
If after all of these hoops have been jumped through, if the jury awards too much in punitive damages, the judge has teh authority to reduce the award by as much as the judge feels is right. Then the Court of Appeal has the right to send it back if it wasn’t enough.
The suggestion that punitive damages should be eliminated entirely is just pure corporate propaganda. I think corporations have done wonderful things for our lives, but without punitive damages, there would be a strong economic incentive supporting the most reckless at the expense of the most responsible.
That would constitute Double jeopardy, as there is already such a thing as fines in a criminal case, as a case which would fall under government jurisdiction would be considered. So the government DOES penalize in a case where it is a criminal case.
Erek
That’s incorrect, mswas. Courts have uniformly held that double jeopardy is not implicated when a criminal defendant is also held liable for civil damages. Punitive damages are designed to punish the defendant’s egregiously bad behavior, but they are not criminal sanctions. Just ask O.J.
Ummm…the same entity that oversees the court system? You know…the goverment. To keep it simple, it could just tax punitive damages at 100%.
A couple of interesting points, to respond to:
-
Is there a law suit mania? That’s a good question. I always hear that law suits are much more prevalent in the US than other Western countries, but have not seen any stats to back this up.
-
Spooje asks me:
If that was to happen, I suspect it would be a criminal offence in Australia under the Trade Practices Act. I don’t have a copy of that legislation at hand though so I don’t know. I will check. I know that the Act provides for $10m penalties for other naughty things like price fixing. Such a penalty might be a disincentive.
- **Jeremy’s Evil Twin ** says:
An argument I have mounted here, recently. Some of the US attorneys who frequent these boards say this is not so, on the basis that if a case is a loser, its a loser, and contigency fees don’t affect that. I have some reservations, but must defer on that issue to those people in the know.
- DPWhite says:
…which sounds very similar to the jurisdictions I am familiar with, but then…
So, juries like to use the punitive remedy to punish people. In Anglo-Australian courts, juries are not used for civil matters. As enderw24 says, there is a real risk of a jury thinking like this:
This is true and actuaries have plenty of stats. Depending on the country, liability losses may be 10 times as high in the US or more.
The tort liability system varies quite a bit by country, and I’m not an expert. I do know that in the UK, there’s a fairly tight formula for awarding damages. In Germany, the trial is done by a judge without a jury.
In the US, the threat of punitive damages induces insurance companies to settle on weaker facts and for more money. Whether this is good or bad depends on the case and on one’s POV. My point is, the overall cost of punitive damages is far greater than the amount of PD’s actually awarded by courts.
Cite, please? And don’t forget to account for alternatives to litigation with which other countries may compensate persons harmed through contracts, torts, crimes, etc.
What other alternative remedies? I had thought that all Western countries shared the same quiver of remedies, with variations in nomenclature.
I’ve seen, e.g., a report prepared ny Tillinghast a few years ago, but I don’t have a copy handy.
Of course, countries with socialized medicine know that the medical costs of the injured party will be covered regardless. Interestingly, in the UK the government health service is now entitled to recover their costs from the tortfeasors in certain circumstances.
Well that last bit is quite interesting. But if medical billsand lost wages are already paid for by the government, I’m sure you’d acknowledge that there’s not much reason for many plaintiffs to sue, at least when compared to the U.S. where such things are not (and should not be, IMHO) taken care of automatically.
Sure, that’s why I mentioned it. I’m not sure about lost wages. My guess is that in mosts jurisdictions injured workers receive only partial wage replacement, at best.
However, health care costs are only a portion of an award in the US, as you know better than I do. I’m sure it varies a lot by the nature of the case, but I would guess that medical costs may average, say, 20% of the total amount awarded. So, the inclusion or exclusion of medical costs doesn’t fully account for US liability costs being 10 times as high.
Cite for “ten times as high,” please? I’m not saying it ain’t true, for I really have no idea about the costs of liability in Myanmar. But I do think that some real numbers would be beneficial to the discussion.
IANAPIL (I Am Not a Personal Injury Lawyer), but my guess is that 95% of all lawsuits settle out of court. The vast majority of those cases settle for pennies on the (claimed) dollar. It’s rare indeed for a settlement to account for much more than the plaintiff’s medical bills and lost wages. Pain & suffering and punitive damages can up the bill by quite a lot, but only if a jury returns a favorable verdict, which is far from a certainty. Just ask the guy who wrote A Civil Action.
Most companies pay you your regular wage for a certain amount of time(10 days is pretty much standard). County and State employees are paid for jury duty, regardless of the length of the trial. My company has an unlimited jury pay policy.
In California, they ask you up front how many days your employer will pay you for. If they pay for none, you can claim financial hardship and get out of it. if you make $100 bucks an hour, you’re pretty much lying through your teeth by claiming hardship. I really don’t think anyones life has been screwed beyond repair due to jury duty.
IMHO, jury duty is just that. A duty. Since this is not the pit I shall not issue an insult for your ‘you are not my peer’ remark. I will state, however, that if you do not serve, you should never complain about jury verdict.
A study in Western Australia a few years back said that 90% of matters do not reach trial.
My gut instinct is that with the threat of punitive damages hanging over them, defendants in the US would be doubly keen to see a matter settled rather than risk the wrath of a jury, and so this percentage might be lower.
With this impetus towards settling, claims which have less merit but might always be sympathetic to a jury are suddenly worth pursuing, at least to a point where a settlement can be reached.
If the pursuit of unmeritorious claims are counter-productive (they clog up courts etc), then punitive damages are counter-productive.