Comments on: Suit seeks to blame Newtown school massacre on gun suppliers

By: HFB

HFB — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 23:53:53 +0000

CarLitGuy…right?!

I pay several percent for the fact that some guy drunk and driving recklessly can’t navigate a 20 mph curve at 80 and the car doesn’t wrap him up in an all-protecting stasis field. He gets injured (Duh!!) and so he sues. Win or lose, we pay for his folly.

I’m sure glad we pay for all these little fishing expeditions so that we “preserve the ability the aggrieved to test the limits of a statute.”

Yay! Group hug…kumbaya…vomit…

By: CarLitGuy

CarLitGuy — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 01:47:52 +0000

In answer to your question, HFB, several % of the MSRP on average. More if your car was inexpensive, less if it was not. Jury verdict on the personal injury/products liability don’t seem to take the cost of the car into account, and attorney fees for the plaintiff dwarf the recovery in warranty suits.

By: HFB

HFB — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 21:01:43 +0000

Agreed. And the plaintiffs should be financially liable for the defense costs when it’s tossed. How much extra did you pay for your car to cover the nuisance litigation expenses? Damn auto companies…

By: MattS

MattS — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 19:01:48 +0000

@John Steele,

“But we must also preserve the ability of the aggrieved to test the limits of a statute.”

Sure, if there is a legitimate grievance, but the plaintiffs in this case don’t have one.

By: John Steele

John Steele — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:36:21 +0000

I don’t find the plaintiffs’ theory at all convincing, but I do not find it to be so meritless that it should not have been filed. I realize that some impact litigation is motivated primarily by the need for social solidarity. When litigation becomes a way of saying, “here’s who I like and here’s who I dislike,” we’ve lost an essential element of the rule of law. But we must also preserve the ability of the aggrieved to test the limits of a statute.