Skip to main content
  • CNSNews.com
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • TimesWatch
  • Take Action!

Join Us @:
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon Kindle

Free email alerts!

NewsBusters logo
May 21, 2013
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Take Action
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • RSS

Hot Topics

  • Obama Targets Fox News
  • IRS Targets Tea Party
  • Censoring the News
Home » Blogs » Chuck Norris's blog
  • After Terrible Storm, ABC Devotes 10 Minutes to Crime, Botox and Entertainment, Skimps on IRS
  • ABC and CBS Ignore Obama Administration Investigating FNC's James Rosen
  • NBC's Gregory Scolds GOP for Comparing Obama to Nixon
  • CBS Highlights Ex-IRS Staffer Who Declares There Were No Politics at Cincinnati Office
  • Monday's Amnesia: CNN Covers Powerball Jackpot Winner as Much as IRS, AP, Benghazi Scandals
  • The Obama Scandal the Big Three Networks Aren't Telling You About
  • WashPost 'Express' Tabloid Cover Laments: How Can Obama 'Break from the Storm' of Scandals?
  • It Gets Worse: WashPost Reports Obama DOJ Also Spied on James Rosen of Fox News

We Need Loser-Pays Tort Reform

By Chuck Norris | May 17, 2011 | 07:30

A  A
Chuck Norris's picture

Last week, President Obama came to my home state of Texas calling for immigration reform. He should have also rallied citizens for tort reform, which is a hot issue right now around the country and in Texas politics in particular.

I've deferred (or better, repackaged) Part 2 of my article on bullies to oppose some real-life legal bullies — those sue-happy individuals (serial litigants) who tie up and abuse our court systems and civil rights to oppress and take from their victims (defendants).

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

These corrupt plaintiffs often initiate frivolous lawsuits because they know most defendants will settle out of court rather than endure the expenses of a trial. The Point of Law website says that "well over 90 percent of cases settle out of court before a final legal resolution" — a fact that serial litigants are counting on.

Black's Law Dictionary says a tort is a "private or civil law wrong or injury, other than breach of contract, for which the court will provide a remedy in the form of an action for damages." Tort law, therefore, is a body of law created through judges and by legislatures that is applied by courts in civil cases dealing with torts. (The term "tort" has its origin from the Latin term torquere, meaning "twist, twisted or wrong.")

As in most states across our union, Texas is in a battle for tort reform because of the serial litigants who take legal action for issues like getting too many kernels in their movie popcorn or not having toilet paper in a restaurant bathroom.

The travesty of these cases and the need for tort reform is bottled up in the fact that defendants are subpoenaed to court and, even when they win their cases, have to pay the tens of thousands (and often hundreds of thousands) of dollars it cost to defend themselves against outrageous and often bizarre accusations. And if they choose to settle out of court, because it cost less than the legal fees to go to court, they still get the shaft.

I know firsthand because I, too, have been the victim of these frivolous lawsuits.

For example, in the 1980s, I had a family restaurant in Newport Beach, Calif. On average, I would encounter one frivolous lawsuit a month.

One such case was two women who got into a fight in the ladies' restroom. They sued me, saying someone should have been in there to break it up! (Yes, that is a true story — frivolous and completely ridiculous.) It cost me $2,000 to pay each plaintiff to drop the complaint, which was cheaper than fighting the lawsuit.

Another frivolous lawsuit happened in Dallas, where the plaintiffs were demanding $175,000 in compensation. After talking to my attorney, he advised me that we could easily win the lawsuit, but it would cost me about $250,000 to fight it.

So, I just paid the $175,000 to save $75,000 in legal fees. It was very frustrating to have to hand over the money just in order to settle a ridiculous lawsuit that had no merit.

If you've fallen prey to the same type of crazy lawsuits, have no fear — loser-pays tort reform is here!

What loser-pays tort reform is all about is forcing these serial litigants to pay for the defendants' legal fees if they lose their case. Last Monday, May 9, the Texas House approved House Bill 274, which requires plaintiffs to do just that. This week, the Texas Senate will hear arguments to determine whether the bill deserves its final approval.

Gov. Rick Perry was correct when he said in a press release last week, "This legislation will also protect Texas jobs and stimulate economic opportunity by relieving Texans and employers of the costs and burdens created by frivolous and drawn-out lawsuits."

This legislation would make the legal system less of a drag on the economy as well as less of a weapon for pilfering wealth. In addition, judges would be further restricted from taking advantage of their sworn duties by unilaterally legislating from the bench in areas that haven't first been approved by the state legislature. Mostly, this legislation will cut down on bogus lawsuits and discourage unfounded and groundless litigation.

I'm opposed to limiting anyone's civil rights, liberties or due process, and loser-pays tort reform will not do that. But in a greedy, sue-happy nation like ours, such legal change is definitely overdue in every state. Frivolous lawsuits are tying up the entire U.S. legal system, hurting our economy and costing jobs everywhere.

If Texas passes loser-pays tort reform, which I encourage all legislatures to do, then the Lone Star State will join Alaska, Oklahoma and Oregon in applying this true English (Prevailing Party) Rule to many civil lawsuits.

Texas resident Mark Whittington, who also writes about state issues for the Yahoo! Contributor Network, echoes well why tort reform hasn't been passed in other states: "... one reason that loser pays has not been more widely enacted in the United States is that the American bar is very powerful and jealously defends what ... is a lucrative industry. Contingency fee lawyers can make a considerable amount of money in filing legal actions, even if sometimes the cases are weak."

I can't roundhouse every junk lawsuit out of Texas or your state, but there is something we all can do to stand up to the trial lawyers and serial litigants. We can support loser-pays tort reform.

Like in Austin, representatives in your state's legislature are undoubtedly working right now to make tort reform a reality — but they can't do it alone. They need to hear from you. Call your representatives and senators, and ask them to help us round up the trial lawyers and lottery litigants by supporting loser-pays tort reform.

For more information and to sign a petition in favor of loser pays tort reform, go to Americans for Job Security website.

  • Rick Perry
  • Government & Press
  • Column
  • Chuck Norris's blog
  • Login to post comments
  • Printer-friendly version
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Comments

I don't even understand why

Submitted by ThatDude on Tue, 05/17/2011 - 8:00am.

I don't even understand why such lawsuits are allowed to proceed. If the basis for them is so weak and pointless, shouldn't they be tossed out when they are filed rather than even involving the defendant?

The answer to 1984 is 1776.
  • Login to post comments

I'd support it

Submitted by bkeyser on Tue, 05/17/2011 - 9:17am.

so long as the filing attorney is also required to pay. I'd worry that legal firms would still push for action by their clients if they were exempted from the penalty for the frivolous nature of it; if they're subject to the pain, they might be less apt to move forward with shaky-at-best complaints.

  • Login to post comments

What Americans Need

Submitted by Tugboat Phil on Tue, 05/17/2011 - 9:49am.

Seems that Lawyers are the largest majority of state and federal legislators. They have no problem calling for Doctors to work for a wage that can be set by statute. This post about frivolous lawsuits proves that any American could find themselves in a courtroom for no logical reason. What we need is "free" legal care.

That's right, Lawyers need to be put on a set wage that everyone can afford. If they can insist that a Doctor perform a life saving procedure for less money than it might actually cost, then they should be able to do with a lot less money.

I know it will never go through, as they control the legislatures, but we could throw it in their faces when they're screwing up every other aspect of our lives. I'm all for loser pays. I'd also like to see an end to "injury" trolling on TV commercials. Am I the only one old enough to remember when Doctors and Lawyers did'nt advertise on TV?

President Obama is a Muslim (from his own lips), Kenyan (read it from his publicist) a homosexual (read it on a news magazine cover) and a Socialist (I'm alive and can see it for myself)
  • Login to post comments

Agreed

Submitted by GW on Tue, 05/17/2011 - 12:16pm.

The only abuse I can think of is if a defendent hires a super-expensive lawyer. The only thing I could think of to prevent this is to have a limit where the loser pays up the cost of his own lawyer. Since I don't know the technical aspects of how much costs what, this might not be a good idea. For example, if it costs $500 to file a lawsuit, but $2000 to defend against it, then my idea would reimburse only $500 (=the legal fee of the loser). Does anyone have examples of what the typical costs are associated with this sort of thing are?

"Unfortunately, some people use belief-based facts rather than fact-based beliefs." -Par for the Course on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 5:38pm
  • Login to post comments

How about this formula for LOSER PAYS

Submitted by Deskpilot on Wed, 05/18/2011 - 8:41pm.

Each court sets a court / day fee schedule. Level of court determines per day fee. LAWYERS or their FIRMS pay 1/2 expected cost UP FRONT. Each day beyond that, the lawyers have to bring a new check to court for 1/2 fees.

i.e. 9th circuit in CA bills @ $5,000 per day. A trial is initially estimated to run 10 days. Each law frim ponies up $25K cashier's check, so the firm can't FLOAT a check. (Afterall, that's illegal) Each additional day, both lawyers have to present another cashiers check for $2,500. Upon adjudication of the case before the court, the prevailing parties check(s) are returned to them, and the defeated party must pay the balance within 10 days.

The defeated LAW FIM then pays the court the balance. It is then incumbant upon the lawyer/firm to collect from their client. If the client defaults, then the lawyers must then engage in whatever legal remedies are available. The taxpayer supported judicial system is not designed to be a collection agent.

I believe this concept would certain pressure lawyers to bring before the courts onlty those cases where there is absolute potential for vistory, and not a guess. it would also severely limit the number of gol-diggers in the legal system, and then real justice could be meted out to real criminals. The backlog of cases would probably be cut by more than 50%.

In our current marketplace, MANY entities collect fees BEFORE service is rendered. Hotles, Rental cars, airlines,

My 2 cents worth of idea

If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, You're welcome - Deskpilot, AM(H)1 (AW), USN (Ret)
  • Login to post comments

The Fed is subsidizing most suits already

Submitted by Boudin on Wed, 05/18/2011 - 8:52pm.

GW suits, HC suits, our Gov picks sides all the time. They demonize big oil, so now it is unaffordable, they hate Coal, which way is your Light bill going?

We bailout the very folks the Fed drives under.  We subsidize both sides of this insanity.

As my Dear Mother used to say: We cant have anything nice!

Seek Truth, Defend Liberty
  • Login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Editors' Picks

  • Study: Christians who tithe have better finances than those who don't (TGC)
  • The media are willing accomplices to Obama (PolitiChicks)
  • FBI has suspects in mind in Benghazi; Obama prefers to try them in court (AP)
  • The folly of 'do something' liberalism (Patriot Update)
  • DOJ targeted more Fox News reporters than Rosen (Twitchy)
  • WashPost vs. WashPost on IRS probe (Ed Morrissey)
  • Media too prone to fall sway to Obama's referrent power (Salena Zito)
  • Five reasons to keep government out of Internet governance (Eli Dourado)
Chuck Norris's picture
Chuck Norris
Chuck Norris Column: Why Tim Tebow Is an Ultimate Clutch Player
Walter E. Williams's picture
Walter E. Williams
Walter E. Williams Column: Hating America
Michelle Malkin's picture
Michelle Malkin
Malkin Column: Obama's Emptiest Benghazi Talking Point
Ann Coulter's picture
Ann Coulter
Coulter Column: Sorry, Sen. Rubio, But Your Immigration Plan Is Still Problematic
David Limbaugh's picture
David Limbaugh
David Limbaugh Column: Partisan Obama Culture Spawned a More Abusive IRS
More >

RSS FeedAmazon KindleFacebookTwitter

Stop Censoring The News!

Gosnell's Just the Tip of the Iceberg
more cartoons
  • NYT Gets Sen. Cruz's Opposition to Marketplace Fairness Act Dead Wrong
  • Oops! CNN Commentator Falsely Accuses Okla. State Rep While Trying to Score Liberal Points on Tornado
  • Sen. Whitehouse Blames GOP For Okla. Tornado, Storms, Rising Seas, Etc.
  • On Leno: Kids Ask Obama the Darndest Questions
  • Morning Joe Meteorologist: Tornado Averted 'By The Grace of Whatever'
More >
NewsBusters

Executive Editor
Matthew Sheffield

Editor at Large
Brent Baker

Senior Editors
Tim Graham
Rich Noyes

Managing Editor
Ken Shepherd

Associate Editor
Noel Sheppard

Contributing Editors
Tom Blumer
Geoffrey Dickens
Dan Gainor
David Limbaugh
Mithridate Ombud
Clay Waters
Scott Whitlock

Senior Contributor
Mark Finkelstein

Contributing Writers
Matthew Balan
Michael M. Bates
Erin R. Brown
Jack Coleman
Kyle Drennen
Douglas Ernst
P. J. Gladnick
Stephen Gutowski
Matt Hadro
D. S. Hube
Kathleen McKinley
Dave Pierre
Amy Ridenour
Julia A. Seymour
Terry Trippany
Rusty Weiss
Brad Wilmouth

Publisher
Brent Bozell

Site Design
Dialog New Media

 

  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • rss
  • CNSNews
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • Take Action!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Amazon Kindle
  • Advertise
  • Jobs

Copyright © 2005-2013 NewsBusters.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use