Subway Train Derailed. This is insane.jojammin t1_j1ush53 wrote
Reply to comment by CookieMonster932 in Subway Train Derailed. This is insane. by fakelitty
....do you think bringing a lawsuit for being injured by a train derailing is frivolous? Are you saying it's okay for trains to derail?
XThunderknight t1_j1utib9 wrote
Couldn't have said it better than myself. Public safety is what influences everything else.
Thuglas82 t1_j1v3ybz wrote
I don't think anyone is saying legal action is unwarranted for those injured. However, looking at the video, this thing looks pretty darn minor. Advising everyone to automatically go on legal offense is irresponsible and just furthering our "sue happy" culture that typically benefits nobody meaningfully but lawyers.
XThunderknight t1_j1v7hk7 wrote
In this case, the facts are the train derailed. While they are numerous factors involved, retaining a lawyer can protect the individuals who were in this train accident, especially the ones that were identified injured. Some lawyers take no-bono. It really comes down to the individual, and how they want to process this incident (this is my opinion, on reddit nethertheless)
If I was on that train, I don't want this incident to happen again to anyone else, so I'll take all the necessary actions to prevent this.
Thuglas82 t1_j1v8lzv wrote
Sometimes accidents are just accidents, and no amount of litigation can stop them. Alternatively, there are so many variables that not all of them can be monitored constantly. In this case, we don't yet know the cause, but implying a lawsuit will fix whatever it is... Is quite premature.
But I certainly do hope the 5 injured individuals have all of their medical bills covered and any related costs associated with the accident. Everyone else? Be happy this was a minor accident.
jojammin t1_j1veddg wrote
You are literally too dumb to be on a jury. What do you think the purpose of the tort system is? It is to make the injured whole. If someone on the train was not injured, they have no damages, there is no case to bring. There is nothing to sue for. No lawyer would take that case. It would get dismissed if it's filing pro SE. The "frivolous law suit" is literally an invention by insurers to take advantage of dumb idiots like yourself to support tort reform to boost their profits. You are dumb. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year
Thuglas82 t1_j1vfz75 wrote
Whew! I'm glad that frivolous lawsuits are not brought (and won or settled) on a regular basis. I'm definitely dumb for thinking that was a normal occurrence. I'm also dumb for believing there are hundreds of law firms that specialize solely on predatory lawsuits. Thanks for clearing all that up for me.
....Oh wait, there are entire websites setup to track this sort of thing easily accessible via Google? Oof. I don't know what to believe now. Factual information, or you.
jojammin t1_j1vhi3j wrote
Wait, what websites track frivolous lawsuits? Send me a link bro
Thuglas82 t1_j1vhr1d wrote
I guess I can spoon feed you information since I'm the "dumb" one. Plenty of pages out there... Here's just one. https://www.judicialhellholes.org/reports/2022-2023/2022-2023-executive-summary/
jojammin t1_j1vioik wrote
Lmao god damn you are dumb. That is literally a propaganda website from right wing think-tanks/chamber of commerce types that lobby to make businesses not accountable for injuring and killing people. You have been taken advantage of my dumb friend
Thuglas82 t1_j1vjh32 wrote
It's fun to watch you lob insults while providing absolutely zero backing for anything you are saying. Meanwhile, if you didn't rely on me to spoon feed you, you would see many bipartisan bills in state legislatures, a GOP one in House, and so on simply to tactical the very thing you say doesn't exist and isn't a problem. Welcome to reply back if you can provide some sort of substance other than unsubstantiated claims and name calling.
jojammin t1_j1vl8es wrote
O my dumb dumb friend. How can I prove a negative, I'll try? Prior to tort reform sweeping the country, did insurers go out of business? No? Just because tort reform bills are bought and paid for by insurer lobbyists, doesn't mean they are addressing a problem. They just want to increase profits at the expense of injured individuals and children getting compensation for pain/suffering/medical treatment
Thuglas82 t1_j1vmcp6 wrote
Why can't you stay on topic? This isn't about insurers, or even tort reform. This is about frivolous lawsuits, which you claim do not exist. A person with no damages cannot file a lawsuit and win, you say. Yet it happens all the time. 50% of the lawyer commercials you see on TV are for "personal injury". The other 50% are class action. Both of which are generally predatory in nature, often push lawsuits that would not and should not exist but they make money regardless, and THAT is the whole point I have repeatedly made while you call me dumb and try to change the subject. You aren't terribly clever.
jojammin t1_j1vnddm wrote
PI lawyers take cases on contingency meaning they receive a % of the settlement given by an insurer or awarded by a jury.
If there are 0 damages (or even if there damages and liability is disputed), insurers don't pay settlements. Jury will not award money if there are no damages.
PI lawyers have no incentive to take the case. It doesn't get filed.
Glittering_Pickle_86 t1_j1vxnt0 wrote
Again, no lawyer is taking on a PI case unless they can make money or fame off of it.
jojammin t1_j1vlivp wrote
Do you own a business? Are you sued a lot for some reason? Why are you blindly advocating for insurers over injured people? Is it because you are a rube?
Glittering_Pickle_86 t1_j1vx763 wrote
Do you realize how expensive it is to try a case? Trust me, no lawyer is going to take a "frivolous lawsuit." You can't just sue because you want to.
Thuglas82 t1_j1vxo85 wrote
When a highly likely outcome is a settlement depending on the scenario, I tend to disagree. They don't have to win, and everyone still gets paid - all while the entity being sued doesn't have to deal with excessive legal and PR costs. Many, many lawsuits are filed in the country simply for the settlement - and that to me is frivolous in many cases.
Glittering_Pickle_86 t1_j1vzewl wrote
Settlements = money with no trial. That's what most PI lawyers go for. Jury trials are 50/50. But again, no one here is working for free.
Glittering_Pickle_86 t1_j1vzlh1 wrote
It also involves a lot of work. Time also = money. You don't just get a email with a settlement amount and then it is over. Again, no one is working for free. No one is taking a case unless they can get paid on it.
jojammin t1_j1vzmue wrote
>They don't have to win, and everyone still gets paid - all while the entity being sued doesn't have to deal with excessive legal and PR costs
Insurance covers their legal defense costs. There is no PR for a car accident or a slip and fall.
I know you couldn't get into law school, but have you ever been a part of a lawsuit? A jury? Your lack of fundamental knowledge of how the world works is disturbing
jojammin t1_j1vh880 wrote
"Bad things happen everyday" does not justify preventing bad things from continuing to occur. You are dumb
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments