2 ms·
Nothing is capped. Because of the potential for paying twice as much to sue someone, only cases where the plaintiff has a good chance of winning make it to cour
by webXL 10y ago
Nothing is capped. Because of the potential for paying twice as much to sue someone, only cases where the plaintiff has a good chance of winning make it to court, thereby putting less demand on legal services. Gawker was not bankrupted by their own legal fees, but by the damages they were ordered to pay out of their own pockets, so nothing is justifying a cap on what the loser must pay in terms of legal fees here. The main point of bringing up loser pays is to reduce the chance that a lawsuit with no chance of winning can bankrupt someone such as Mother Jones.
- ryanlol 10y agoAgain, what stops a litigant from using loser pays to bankrupt other parties?