Levitation":9rmj9tka said:
As far as juries in the USA, their aggregate IQ is roughly 94 and any lawyer with an IQ higher than that can get a ham sandwich convicted for causing obesity...
If and when these unsane jury awards begin to throttle commerce in the USA, then the collapse of large corporations will put pressure on Congress to inure them from damages... Until then, ATLA runs amok...
denny-o
1) Hmmmm - the jury I served on a couple of years ago, must have been an exception as all the people seemed quite reasonable and reasonably intelligent. BTW - the average IQ is 100 as the test is designed to center on 100.
2) As far as the total effect of tort awards on the US economy, the $ amount per year is highly disputed with estimates from the insurance industry and corporate consultants being much higher than estimates from others (like lawyers). This should come as no surprise as different camps have different agendas. However, for at least one alternate point of view, it might be useful for some to read the pdf that can be downloaded at
this link. This is a critique of the methods used in a widely cited source for the cost of the U.S. tort system. The other major source cited for the cost of the tort system is the annual Tillinghast report. The methods used by Tillinghast to arrive at the tort costs in the U.S. have also been widely criticized. See for example
this link. I'm not taking a position on which numbers are correct, I'm just pointing out that there is considerable controversy over both the sources of the data and the interpretation. Hence, one should wonder about whether specific cases such as this are really indicative of a general need for widespread tort reform or just wacky outliers where good sense does not appear to be applied.
3) The groups that regularly bash the tort system rarely make any attempt to quantify any benefits of the tort system. What has been saved over time as the result of increases in product safety that are the direct result of lawsuits? I'm fairly confident that baby cribs, seats and toys are safer as a result of the tort system and I can remember specific examples of widely publicized lawsuits that resulted in changes in the design of such. What has been saved as the result of changes in many industry practices as the result of lawsuits? I don't know, there aren't any good studies that accurately estimate these cost savings. But I do seem to remember that there was a time in the not too distant past when there was a general lack of safety shields, belt covers etc in industrial manufacturing and people were more frequently injured in the process of operating industrial machinery.
So while this specific case seems more than a little ridiculous, and while the current tort system is anything but perfect, we may not benefit from sweeping tort reform that some in congress call for and some in congress resist.
Signed,
Your friendly devil's advocate
