A tort requires compensation usually in money to those who have been victims of loss of income, pain and suffering or loss of future income in some cases. Tort is designed to provide full compensation for proved destruction or harm. Torts have been known to be too frivolous, and to reform torts would be beneficial towards corporations; when they pay compensation towards consumers, patients and their clients for damages from fraud, negligence, medical malpractice and other tort claims. Lawsuits over socially beneficial practices increase the costs of their businesses and small businesses/corporations are more affected by litigation because legal expenses can put small businesses in economic failure.
A frivolous lawsuit is basically one that cannot be supported under existing legal precedent, and also a definition used to define tort lawsuits where there is only an isolated connection between the actions of the defendant and the injuries alleged by the plaintiff; the damages sought by the injured plaintiff are perceived to be excessive than the injuries that were sustained. There are also lawsuits brought on by hypothetical damages when the plaintiffs have suffered no tangible harm and this is why a tort reform is absolutely needed.
Those who support tort reform, condone more regulation should be done through the process of litigation; meaning that litigation is being used to achieve regulatory means that advocates would be unable to attain through the autonomous process. Reforms of tort if utilized properly can radically reduce the costs of conducting business which in turn benefits consumers
Norkin 2
and the public on a long term basis. Corporations and insurance companies are known to be exploiters in the litigation system. Larger companies tend to use their resources that are prone to delay trial, shadow and track frivolous appeals and contest claims in which liability is present. There should be a non-fiscal damage cap placed on limiting a jury’s ability to award damages to victims for their pain and suffering in addition to punitive damages. The purpose of restructuring torts would allow fair compensation towards victims while preventing gratuitous and emotionally intertwined jury awards from bringing entire organizations to bankruptcy and a loss of jobs and the increase of consumer prices.
The economic penalty of having such heavy tort costs encourages tort reform. Individuals suffer from having less disposable income due to higher premiums for automobile and other methods of insurance. Businesses will indirectly make these individuals suffer when they raise higher premiums for product liability and the prices on their goods and services. In addition to higher costs, businesses are in fact, losing business and are lacking economic growth. Those living and working in high density areas such a urban environments, are more prone to be expose to increased costs of the tort system. This is because auto insurance and other tort related prices are increased in higher density areas; the increase of tort is significant in an urban environment.
In an effort to help control tort costs, there is a method named the Moore-Gephardt approach, which was mainly used to define medical malpractice cases. The Moore-Gephardt method is when a defendant agrees to pay for all economic damages and attorney fees, then the defendant is liable for economic damages but not for non-economic
