4 ms·

How is it broken to require a defendant to respond to a lawsuit?

by tiahura 5y ago

BeetleB 5y ago
Because an innocent person can be bankrupted by repeatedly having to respond to frivolous lawsuits.
- tiahura 5y ago
  Can anyone find an example of that actually happening?
  - BeetleB 5y ago
    Not bankruptcy but this type of abuse? Sure: https://dailyillini.com/news-stories/2013/04/26/suburban-express-lawsuits-reach-125-this-year-conversation-continues-on-reddit/ https://dailyillini.com/news-stories/2013/04/26/suburban-exp... He would intentionally file lawsuits in another county because he knew it's too much of a burden for many students to travel there for court hearings. Students just settle even if they think they're completely innocent.
- swat535 5y ago
  I discussed this very particular issue with my friend who is an attorney, he mentioned that you can't actually abuse the system with frivolous lawsuits. Judges will start throwing your cases out and you can be disciplined by the BAR.
  - tannedNerd 5y ago
    At the same you don’t think google is big enough to hire lawyers to file n-1 the amount to get fined or punished frivolous lawsuits against you and keep rotating lawyers?
    - tiahura 5y ago
      No, because at n=3 the the judge will say “if you file another one of these, I’ll fine you $1,000,000, and Sundar better be here at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow so I can explain it to him personally.” Courts and judges aren’t something to be truffled with.
      - tannedNerd 5y ago
        So then a different google subsidiary with no clear connections will file the suit next. Also if google wants to do something or ruin someone a few million dollar fine isn't going to deter them one bit
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
margalabargala 5y ago
Not that concept, just our specific implementation. If person A decides they don't like you, they can sue you over and over and cost you tens of thousands of dollars and never get that back. If you don't reply to each with a lawyer and spend time and money fighting, you lose even more money. There are some bandaids like having someone declared a vexatious litigant, but that also requires time and money. If you owned some small business, someone could certainly bankrupt you before you could stop them. I don't know exactly what a solution looks like, but I do see this as a problem.
- tiahura 5y ago
  If person A decides they don't like you, they can sue you over and over and cost you tens of thousands of dollars and never get that back. As an attorney, I’ve never even heard of that actually happening - other than prisoner litigation. Moreover, a judge will order someone to stop filing cases if they are bringing frivolous claims, and can hold them in contempt if they do.
ajdude 5y ago
IANAL but my guess is that it costs money for the defendant to respond to a lawsuit, so if company A wants person B to stop doing something, even if person B is within their legal right to do so, company A can still force person B to stop, because either person B goes bankrupt fighting it or person B ignores it and company A has the judgement in their favor.
Rexxar 5y ago
Because (if I understand correctly) the judge side with the plaintiff without looking at the case : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_judgment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_judgment.

How is it broken to require a defendant to respond to a lawsuit?

BeetleB 5y ago

Because an innocent person can be bankrupted by repeatedly having to respond to frivolous lawsuits.

tiahura 5y ago
Can anyone find an example of that actually happening?
- BeetleB 5y ago
  Not bankruptcy but this type of abuse? Sure: https://dailyillini.com/news-stories/2013/04/26/suburban-express-lawsuits-reach-125-this-year-conversation-continues-on-reddit/ https://dailyillini.com/news-stories/2013/04/26/suburban-exp... He would intentionally file lawsuits in another county because he knew it's too much of a burden for many students to travel there for court hearings. Students just settle even if they think they're completely innocent.
swat535 5y ago
I discussed this very particular issue with my friend who is an attorney, he mentioned that you can't actually abuse the system with frivolous lawsuits. Judges will start throwing your cases out and you can be disciplined by the BAR.
- tannedNerd 5y ago
  At the same you don’t think google is big enough to hire lawyers to file n-1 the amount to get fined or punished frivolous lawsuits against you and keep rotating lawyers?
  - tiahura 5y ago
    No, because at n=3 the the judge will say “if you file another one of these, I’ll fine you $1,000,000, and Sundar better be here at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow so I can explain it to him personally.” Courts and judges aren’t something to be truffled with.
    - tannedNerd 5y ago
      So then a different google subsidiary with no clear connections will file the suit next. Also if google wants to do something or ruin someone a few million dollar fine isn't going to deter them one bit

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

margalabargala 5y ago

Not that concept, just our specific implementation. If person A decides they don't like you, they can sue you over and over and cost you tens of thousands of dollars and never get that back. If you don't reply to each with a lawyer and spend time and money fighting, you lose even more money. There are some bandaids like having someone declared a vexatious litigant, but that also requires time and money. If you owned some small business, someone could certainly bankrupt you before you could stop them. I don't know exactly what a solution looks like, but I do see this as a problem.

tiahura 5y ago
If person A decides they don't like you, they can sue you over and over and cost you tens of thousands of dollars and never get that back. As an attorney, I’ve never even heard of that actually happening - other than prisoner litigation. Moreover, a judge will order someone to stop filing cases if they are bringing frivolous claims, and can hold them in contempt if they do.

ajdude 5y ago

IANAL but my guess is that it costs money for the defendant to respond to a lawsuit, so if company A wants person B to stop doing something, even if person B is within their legal right to do so, company A can still force person B to stop, because either person B goes bankrupt fighting it or person B ignores it and company A has the judgement in their favor.

Rexxar 5y ago

Because (if I understand correctly) the judge side with the plaintiff without looking at the case : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_judgment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_judgment.