Death penalty is good, very good. It is just like pest termination. It is good to the society and it is extremely good to the taxpayers because we don?’t have to waste our hard-earned money to board those criminals anymore.

Damage awards are good also, but it is only good to the patients (received around 60%) and lawyers (received around 40% after reimbursement of expenses).

However, there is an unpleasant ?“side-effect?” for large damage awards and it affects all of us ?– no ending large insurance premium increase.

Insurance companies are in business for profit which is not a sin. Whether the insurance companies settled the lawsuits out of the court or got punished by the jury, the result is the SAME. The insurance companies will pass the losses to the insurance policy holders which are the doctors and ordinary citizens ?– YOU and ME!

You're missing the point

If you think your health insurance costs are going to decrease any time soon as a result of this proposal, I have a bridge for sale that I would love to talk to you about.

Where did the Bridge come from?

The insurance costs will most certainly have to keep going up to keep up with the Lawyer's salaries.

The Lawyers make the money on both sides of the Frivolous Lawsuit. The Trial Lawyer makes the money by sueing and the Defending Lawyer makes the money trying to defend the frivolous suit.

The suit itself might not make it to trial but both sides lawyers will make their money and the insurances will be the ones paying it!

Insurance co's don't pay

I think the problems started with greedy insurance companies, who line the pockets of congressmen, who are mostly lawyers.

If Insurance companies paid fairly and promptly, there wouldn'b be so man lawsuits. INSURANCE COMPANIES have no integrity and ye they are allowed to cooperate on rates, customer data (yes, they all share you credit history and know about every legal problem you have every encountered, not just wrecks and claim history), and they all share the same accuary databases.

Insurance companies had destroyed the business that originall was designed to protect us. Insurance coverage is even mandated by law = how convinent is that that ?

And the big awards only make the head lines. Less than 3% of all jury award reach those sky high figures, and most of them are never paid because of lengthy littiegation, appeals, and even bankruptcy.

I have a good friend who has a 5 acre lot off of Davis lane, where her tiny cottage was condemed for mold problems - sealed-up. Nobody can live there, but she still has to pay her mortage company and insurance company premiums, and meanwhile, they have spent over a year debating about what to do and how they will fix the house.

The cost of repairs exceeds the fair market value of the house, so you would think the insurance company would demolish the house and just pay off the mortgage ?

No, they insist on repairing it, knowing full well that no one will ever buy the house after this mess, no other company will insure it again, and no mortgage company will ever loan money on it again.

Worse, the insurance company retains and demands the right to approve the contracts bids and then will not pay until the work is complete and inspected by the city. After all that, they write a check to 5 parties, not to the homeowner who pays the premiums.

Think that's sad, I watched an edlerly couple pay for emergency repairs to their house after a tornadoe pushed a tree through it. They spent $50,000 of their savings for repiars and the insurance company won't pay because the insurance company did get to pre-approve the contractors. And quess what, in an emergency like that, there were ''required to make necessary repairs'' by the same insurance company. Contractors were scarce and coming in from other states for the next 6 months. The home owners only recoverd 20% of their expenses. They had no choice but to sue....

Insurance companies are the problem here, not the courts or the lawyers.