3 ms·
It could be done that it is not loser pays by default. Instead, if a case is won, and the case was deemed frivolous, only then could loser-pays be enacted. But
by kefka 10y ago
It could be done that it is not loser pays by default. Instead, if a case is won, and the case was deemed frivolous, only then could loser-pays be enacted.
But it still doesn't solve the idea that the "Law is more equal the more money you have." .
- brianwawok 10y agoThis is essentially how it works today, from my understanding. If you lose and your suit was 100% without merrit, you can be sued for lawyer fees. From what I understand, the problem is the bar for meritless is very very very high. Not sure how you legislate that. I think most lawsuits are meritless. A lawyer may have a very different opinion.
- igravious 10y ago“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” A lawyer's salary depends on him not having the opinion that most lawsuits are meritless.