(The following post was written at the same time as my review of Runaway Jury. I decided that it would be much better as a separate post.)
What makes a lawsuit "frivilous"? What is the proper criteria to call a lawsuit ridiculous? Little more than a year ago, I believe that I would have given a very different opinion on the subject than I will present today.
I'm going to give a basic plot outline concerning the lawsuit the actual plot of Runaway Jury surrounds. A man is fired from a trading firm (I think). He then buys a gun, returns to his workplace, and kills eleven people before committing suicide. The widow brings a lawsuit against the gun manufacturer alleging negligence in their selling and marketing practices.
A year or so ago, no one would have been able to convince me that this woman's motive was anything other than greed. Her husband was killed and she lost half of her household income. She sees an opportunity to milk a wealthy industry for a large chunk of money. If she wins and the jury is sympathetic, she would never have to work again. She would use her husband's unfortunate death to ascend to a life of luxury. Are there any motives behind this other than money? I would have been certain that she has convinced herself that there were, but I would not have believed any actually existed.
Today, due to personal experience with tragedy, I have a very different outlook.
As I'm sure any regular reader of this blog knows, my sister was killed in a horrible accident approximately one year ago. In my opinion, this accident happened due to the negligence of the company involved. The facility involved did not have a fence around it, did not have warning signs in easily visible locations, and did not have any kind of locking mechanism on the container which exploded. To my knowledge, very few people in the surrounding area knew of the danger surrounding the equipment. The equipment itself appeared to be in a horrible state of decay--rust and holes were visible almost everywhere.
In light of evidence such as this, I believe that a negligence/wrongful death lawsuit is completely appropriate. My family is not seeking a financial award. Any money received from the group lawsuit is completely secondary. We want the regulations concerning the site of the accident changed. Unfortunately, the only real way to do that is with a lawsuit. As the explosion itself was caused by survivor of the accident, many people may see the lawsuit as frivilous. After all, it wasn't the company that tried to look into the container. Still, the company had very dangerous areas that were easily accessible by young teenagers.
My family and the other families may be seen by some in the same light as I used to see many "wrongful death" plaintiffs. My perspective on the matter, however, has changed greatly. Lawsuits that appear "frivilous" can be deeper than one might realize.
This rather obvious epiphany has caused me to become more interested in the facts behind lawsuits commonly seen as ridiculous attempts to get easy money. I'm not saying that all lawsuits are valid; however, I am saying that one shouldn't wave off something as frivilous without checking the facts of the case first.
Posted by Randy at April 5, 2004 01:27 AM | TrackBackThe issue at the heart of the matter is: where does personal responsibility end and corporate negligence begin? Obviously the majority of blame in a gun violence situation lies on the individual who chooses to fire the gun on people. In other words, I believe that responsibilty should still lie with the individual who chooses an incorrect action according to the law.
However, if it can be proven that a company supports these individuals (either through target marketing or negligent policy) than they should be punished (not held accountable for the crime). The only way the due process of law can punish a company is through money. Now if the government were to sue the company for what most would believe would be a reasonable ammount, it would merely be as a pin-prick to the larger companies. Therefore settlements are awarded in a large ammount in order to exact a good scale of punishment upon the company itself.
I will be the first to admit that I feel a little uneasy when I hear the ammounts that people recieve as the result of settlements, and I will be the first to identify with those who believe that the courts are filled with frivolous (and down right stupid) lawsuits. This extension of the law is required in our current level of government control in order to allow the government to influence companies, however there are many cases where the party at fault is clearly not the company. This is why courts are left in the hands of an educated judge and (hopefully) an educated people who will hopefully be able to see through a ridiculous execuse for a lawsuit.
Posted by: Codepainter at April 5, 2004 12:08 PM