Agreed Rob--The US legal environment nearly killed private avation in this
country for exactly that reason; settlements drive up prices to consumers.
Mark Noakes
In a message dated 3/5/99 2:24:03 PM, you wrote:
<<On Fri, 5 Mar 1999 09:37:57 -0800, you wrote:
>Lewis:
>This is a fun one...
>You're right on with the stats.
>
>Personnally, I think that this is a two-sided case. If I were in the jury,
>I guess I would go for the plaintiff as well (just out of spite for McDs -
>big bucks).
The other side of the coin: these excessively large settlements only benefit
two people. The plaintiff, and their attorney(ies). Who is hurt? You and I.
We get higher prices as a result. Is MickeyD's affected? I assure you they
don't dip into their profits to cover the settlement, they just raise prices.
Just wanted to throw that out if you or others get a chance to sit on one of
these ridiculous cases. If someone is injured through negligence of a
company,
they deserve compensation, but maybe it should be a reasonable compensation.
There was NOTHING reasonable about a 2-million dollar judgement for the damage
done. Trying to make a point to the company doesn't hurt the company, but it
does hurt the rest of us and DOES have a snow-ball (copy-cat) affect and is
now
rampant and we are all paying daily.
Rob>>
oletrucks is devoted to Chevy and GM trucks built between 1941 and 1959
|