Reactionary

Here’s a clip from the New York Times:

The Supreme Court has already indicated that at some point punitive damages become so large that they violate due process. But it has done a poor job of identifying that point. Originally, it laid down some reasonable factors for lower courts to consider, including how reprehensible they considered the defendant’s conduct. But in 2003, the court put forth the dubious proposition that punitive damages should generally be in a “single digit” ratio to actual damages — so with actual damages of, say, $100,000, punitive damages should be under $1 million.

I think rewarding people tens of millions of dollars is a crime. The lawyers who claim a percentage of money awarded make so much, they go around chasing non-issues to turn into more frivolous lawsuits like the whole “McDonalds made me fat”. Here’s an idea. Why not award the money to some nonprofit organization that’s working in a related field or to a state to improve its people’s lives. The victim gets actual damages and someone else gets the punitive damages. Thusly, the company being sued gets punished if they are in fact guilty and enormous sums of money don’t go to individuals. Would there be fewer frivolous lawsuits that cost us millions a year in taxes if people can’t use it as a get rich scheme.

Posted on October 31st, 2006 under Life, News •  Print •  Email • RSS 2.0 feed • Leave a response, or trackback