- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Plaintiff attorneys are definitely supporting Jeff Landry
Posted on 8/29/23 at 11:51 am to Riverside
Posted on 8/29/23 at 11:51 am to Riverside
quote:
I’ve been championing tort reform for years. I played a role in keeping the 2019 bill alive when it nearly died in committee.
Very cool!
Since you know something, what needs to happen next on tort reform? What are the actions that need to happen to really move the needle?
1
Posted on 8/29/23 at 12:07 pm to Riverside
quote:
No, the tort reform bill started in 2019.
I didn't say he introduced the first tort reform bill. I said the first bill he introduced was about tort reform. In other words, it was a priority of his early on in his career. If the bill didn't pass in 2019, then maybe it needed to be "watered down" in order to get something done. Take what you can and continue the fight.
Posted on 8/29/23 at 12:44 pm to Kreg Jennings
And Hewitt wants to appoint DIMs
Nelson really only wants that LABI job
And Wags was a covid Nazi, instead of fighting JBE for our freedoms
Wilson is JBE redux
I'll stick with Landry, but thanks for exposing your biases
Nelson really only wants that LABI job
And Wags was a covid Nazi, instead of fighting JBE for our freedoms
Wilson is JBE redux
I'll stick with Landry, but thanks for exposing your biases
Posted on 8/29/23 at 12:52 pm to Riverside
quote:
I’ve been championing tort reform for years. I played a role in keeping the 2019 bill alive when it nearly died in committee.
So you admit that the politicians lied to everyone when they claimed it was an “omnibus” insurance bill?
For the record, I’m not against tort reform. I’m against being lied to.
Posted on 8/29/23 at 1:30 pm to BigJim
We need to revamp many of the efforts from 2020 and go further if you want real tort reform.
-We need to make it an across the board $10,000 demand limit in civil cases for jury trials.
-Reduce the jurisdiction of city courts/parish courts to under $10,000 in all civil cases.
-Allow evidence of attorney payments of medical bills and payments by third party medical funding companies.
-Require that all future medical damages awards be placed in trust accounts with unused funds reverting back to the defendant if not used for future treatment, similar to how claims against the state are handled.
-Eliminate attorneys fee awards in bad faith cases.
These proposals would be a game changer.
-We need to make it an across the board $10,000 demand limit in civil cases for jury trials.
-Reduce the jurisdiction of city courts/parish courts to under $10,000 in all civil cases.
-Allow evidence of attorney payments of medical bills and payments by third party medical funding companies.
-Require that all future medical damages awards be placed in trust accounts with unused funds reverting back to the defendant if not used for future treatment, similar to how claims against the state are handled.
-Eliminate attorneys fee awards in bad faith cases.
These proposals would be a game changer.
Posted on 8/29/23 at 1:34 pm to Kreg Jennings
It kind of makes sense. Judging by attorney Billboards, if you lock up the lawyer vote, you automatically have the majority % of the vote.
Posted on 8/29/23 at 1:35 pm to Riverside
Some of those are unrealistic and I currently work on the defense and commercial side.
PI attorneys pay the doctors after the case concludes under a letter of protection. The best you could get would be to have those letters discoverable.
“Attorney fees” are not awarded in a PI case unless it’s UM/UIM and it goes to verdict. PI attorneys collect their fees after the case from the settlement or verdict on a contingency basis at usually 33-40%.
PI attorneys pay the doctors after the case concludes under a letter of protection. The best you could get would be to have those letters discoverable.
“Attorney fees” are not awarded in a PI case unless it’s UM/UIM and it goes to verdict. PI attorneys collect their fees after the case from the settlement or verdict on a contingency basis at usually 33-40%.
Posted on 8/29/23 at 1:36 pm to Kreg Jennings
That’s one attorney. Landry isn’t particularly popular with the plaintiffs’ bar. He and his family reportedly hire plenty of illegals, though, according to many sources.
Posted on 8/29/23 at 1:37 pm to Suntiger
No one lied. It was a good first step at reform. Sadly, the Republicans, like Nelson, quit pushing for more reforms after 2020.
Posted on 8/29/23 at 1:38 pm to NIH
They are awardable in first party insurance cases. It’s one of the issues that has hurt our homeowners insurance market.
Posted on 8/29/23 at 1:39 pm to Kreg Jennings
quote:
Kreg Jennings
You certainly can't be trusted. You've already shown your hand.
Posted on 8/29/23 at 1:40 pm to Riverside
If you eliminate attorney’s fees why would the attorney take that case? And how is it different from an attorney collecting in a purely commercial context between two businesses? Seems silly.
Posted on 8/29/23 at 1:44 pm to NIH
The attorney can still take his/her contingency fee from the aggregate award of damages.
Posted on 8/29/23 at 1:46 pm to Riverside
Based off of damages to a home? Yeah, that isn’t going to cut it.
Are you an attorney?
Are you an attorney?
Posted on 8/29/23 at 2:12 pm to NIH
Let me say thanks to both of you. This kind of detailed discussion is helpful even (maybe because?) you disagree.
But let me ask NIH, what would you change if you were in charge?
But let me ask NIH, what would you change if you were in charge?
Posted on 8/29/23 at 2:14 pm to Riverside
quote:
Eliminate attorneys fee awards in bad faith cases.
If one party acts in bad faith, why shouldn't that party be forced to pay the costs of the non-BF party?
Posted on 8/29/23 at 2:28 pm to Riverside
quote:
We need to make it an across the board $10,000 demand limit in civil cases for jury trials.
Are Gordon and the mills really churning a high volume of cases within the $10k-$50k range where this is affecting bottom lines?
This post was edited on 8/29/23 at 2:29 pm
Posted on 8/29/23 at 2:49 pm to Riverside
quote:
No one lied. It was a good first step at reform. Sadly, the Republicans, like Nelson, quit pushing for more reforms after 2020.
They absolutely lied. They said it was an insurance bill and not a tort reform bill. They said it would reduce car insurance. Neither was true.
If you want tort reform, fine. Just don’t lie and say it’s something it’s not.
Posted on 8/29/23 at 2:58 pm to Kreg Jennings
You look elsewhere then and the rest will get Landry in.
Posted on 8/29/23 at 4:23 pm to BigJim
Take away the direct action statute. Existence of Insurance should not be relevant to a jury’s decision to award damages.
Lower district court pleading barrier to $10,000.00.
Make LOP agreements discoverable if parties are seeking medical bills as damages.
Lower district court pleading barrier to $10,000.00.
Make LOP agreements discoverable if parties are seeking medical bills as damages.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News