I'm not a Bush fan, but I am glad he helped with this class action reform. I was(without choice) included in a class action against Sears several years ago. Sears suddenly went to over 20% interest on their credit cards including previous balances that were for a far less percentage.
The class action was settled, I got some discount coupons on future purchases at Sears that amounted to only a few dollars and the lawyers left with millions of dollars in fees.
I was left no recourse. Other to pay Sears off at a higher rate and no longer dealing with Sears.
The rate did not change.

Class action suits are a joke. They're rarely instigated by the supposed victims but rather by the lawyers that actively seek someone to be lead plaintiff. And they rarely give the supposed victims anything more than a few coupons that actually increase the business of the place that wronged them. It's definitely time to get these things out of the podunk local courts and in front of some federal judges. (except for the part where we have no where near enough federal judges due to the idiots in Congress and their supporters who think the most crucial issue a judge faces is abortion, when in fact most of them will never see an abortion case).

Yeah, I think this was a good call too. The forum shopping allowed in class action suits is ridiculous (often you can file suit in any county where one of your many plaintiffs lives). Furthermore, since these suits typically cross borders, it makes sense to federalize them. So for once, I think Bush has done a good thing here.

Anyone read Grisham's King of Torts ?

Hurrah the people have finally been denied their ability to get whatever meager compensation they could squeeze out of corporations in the first place.

Fuck the lawyers but more so fuck the coporations. The lawyers fees wouldnt be needed if these entities based on pure greed were taken out if they ever harmed the people they pretend to serve.

I have to agree with 500 on this one. Clas action suits were not aboput getting something back from the companies, they were about forcing the companies to stop doing something and fining them for doing it.

Now we have no recourse. Thanks again shrub jr for taking away something else that was working.

Originally posted by Echo2
I have to agree with 500 on this one. Clas action suits were not aboput getting something back from the companies, they were about forcing the companies to stop doing something and fining them for doing it.

Now we have no recourse. Thanks again shrub jr for taking away something else that was working.

That's BS - the federal court system is open to any and all class actions. The only change is that they'll be in front of federal judges instead of the guy in Podunk County that was voted into office because he promised to consult the Bible before sentencing people. Unless you view having a judge that has more expertise a bad thing.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/04/1537236&mode=thread&tid=25

" The President is proposing to cap their non-economic damages at $250,000 to take care of these children for the rest of their life.

AMY GOODMAN: What does that mean, "non-economic damages?"

JOANNE DOROSHOW: Non-economic means compensation for things like blindness, permanent disfigurement, brain damage. It's not the kind of injury that you go and get a receipt for. These are, when a hospital commits an egregious error and your child is blind for the rest of their life, that's what non-economic damages are."
++++++++++++++++++++
Justice is distorted, and our economy is held back by irresponsible class-actions and frivolous asbestos claims -- and I urge Congress to pass legal reforms this year." --Bush
yeah all those frivilous people whining about coughing blood up every day because some company hid their findings so they could make more of a profit. Notice he said the economy is being held bcak instead of talking about the fellow Americans being murdered and maimed for profit.

Were not talking about innocent mistakes here. We are talking about companies that are knowingly putting out harmful products to make money. And what the president is doing is saying "its OK for them to endanger americans to try and make a profit but its not OK for them to lose money for allowing their fellow Americans to remain ignorant in taking those risks"

Example : If I watch my 3 year old kid try cutting something with a knife and I dont warn him that it is sharp...When he cuts himself I say what: too bad you should have known better? Is it OK for me to let him bleed all over the place giving no comfort or bandaids? Or so long as I say "oh sorry" and dont give him a bandaid is it OK? How about if I give him half a bandaid after he waits 2 years to convicing his mom I never warned him?

"justice delayed is justice denyed"
--?

I got a better solution. How about you drastically increase government fines on companies that harm people? How about you create a death penalty for companies that repeatedly harm Americans? Why dont you make it easier for consumers to request the research on products?

The problem here isnt frivilous lawsuits. The problem here is dangerous companies. You tired of greedy lawyers? Then have the government stand up to corporations and protect Americans. Have the government fine the companies then distibute the payment. Punishing those who have already been hurt by corporations just adds insult to injury. But thats the way the government works, something goes wrong, put the burden on the people.

its called frivilous asshole, if you got a case its not frivilous, fucking grow up dipshit

Originally posted by Travh20
its called frivilous asshole, if you got a case its not frivilous, fucking grow up dipshit travh, now that wasnt called for. that is a very good argument he's making, but even if it werent, the subject matter doesnt call for your childish name calling. WHERE IN THE HELL IS BORG NOW !!! man travh, i gave you more credit than that . i know that what i think of you doesnt matter, but i am a little suprised that for partisan reasons, you think its ok, and if you dont think its ok, why are you insulting 500 ?

I KNOW ASBESTOS WORKERS THAT HAVE GOTTEN THAT SHIT IN THEM......IT IS NO JOKE !! how dare anyone make light of this. this is so damn unreal. these guys have families. if you dont agree, then dont, and pray to god you are never put in that situation. but there are things that companies know of and are not telling workers. they get some FRIVILOUS disease, and the company goes free ? HOW IN HELL IS THAT A GOOD THING ???> FUCK !!

Originally posted by 500lbguerilla
JOANNE DOROSHOW: Non-economic means compensation for things like blindness, permanent disfigurement, brain damage. It's not the kind of injury that you go and get a receipt for. These are, when a hospital commits an egregious error and your child is blind for the rest of their life, that's what non-economic damages are."

"non-economic" damages aren't even defined in the most commonly used legal dictionary, so how is she so sure of this definition.

It's absolutely possible to put a price tag on long-term care, lost wages, etc. caused by injuries - it's done all the time. I can only assume that they're speaking of punitive damages.

Originally posted by korg
travh, now that wasnt called for. that is a very good argument he's making, but even if it werent, the subject matter doesnt call for your childish name calling. WHERE IN THE HELL IS BORG NOW !!! man travh, i gave you more credit than that . i know that what i think of you doesnt matter, but i am a little suprised that for partisan reasons, you think its ok, and if you dont think its ok, why are you insulting 500 ?

I apologize to you korg, but not to 500lbguerilla. this guy is a world class you know what. go read some of his posts and you will see what I mean. this guy had it coming.

hey travh, i appreciate that man. you guys always show good character when called upon.

Understand that you can still file a lawsuit against any person, company, or corporation that you feel has wronged you.