<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Loser-pays provision in 2011 Texas legal reform	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2015/01/loser-pays-provision-2011-texas-legal-reform/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2015/01/loser-pays-provision-2011-texas-legal-reform/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2015 18:14:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: alficles		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2015/01/loser-pays-provision-2011-texas-legal-reform/comment-page-1/#comment-318643</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[alficles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2015 18:14:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=50956#comment-318643</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m just verifying... This article is behind a paywall for everybody, right? It&#039;s not just me?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m just verifying&#8230; This article is behind a paywall for everybody, right? It&#8217;s not just me?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Curmudgeonly Ex-Clerk		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2015/01/loser-pays-provision-2011-texas-legal-reform/comment-page-1/#comment-318603</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Curmudgeonly Ex-Clerk]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2015 05:02:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=50956#comment-318603</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[As a Texas lawyer, I have never invoked the new dismissal motion. Nor have I seen it invoked. The mandatory fee provision is a poison pill that ensures these motions seldom see the light of day in general and where they are most apt in particular. In a bad jurisdiction (which Texas still has many of), corporate defendants can count on these motions being denied even when they should not be. So, unless you&#039;d like to give the plaintiff&#039;s counsel some money, filing one makes no sense.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a Texas lawyer, I have never invoked the new dismissal motion. Nor have I seen it invoked. The mandatory fee provision is a poison pill that ensures these motions seldom see the light of day in general and where they are most apt in particular. In a bad jurisdiction (which Texas still has many of), corporate defendants can count on these motions being denied even when they should not be. So, unless you&#8217;d like to give the plaintiff&#8217;s counsel some money, filing one makes no sense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: thufir_hawat		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2015/01/loser-pays-provision-2011-texas-legal-reform/comment-page-1/#comment-318567</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[thufir_hawat]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2015 15:30:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=50956#comment-318567</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Not in my experience. Both Hon. Hoffman and Wingo are more accurate: They get filed occasionally but they don&#039;t get set or heard.  The risk of fee switching to (and thereby funding) a Plaintiff you already think is frivolous is too much to stomach. 

To wit:
Hon. Hoffman: &quot;I have seen a number of motions to dismiss baseless causes of action.&quot; [note: not hearings or orders]
Wingo: &quot;I have seen a few of these filed, but they have always been worked out before the point of no return.&quot;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not in my experience. Both Hon. Hoffman and Wingo are more accurate: They get filed occasionally but they don&#8217;t get set or heard.  The risk of fee switching to (and thereby funding) a Plaintiff you already think is frivolous is too much to stomach. </p>
<p>To wit:<br />
Hon. Hoffman: &#8220;I have seen a number of motions to dismiss baseless causes of action.&#8221; [note: not hearings or orders]<br />
Wingo: &#8220;I have seen a few of these filed, but they have always been worked out before the point of no return.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
