3 ms·
That's ultimately why the loser of a civil case should be on the hook for all attorneys fees and court costs. I'd actually go further and argue that a plaintiff
by bdw5204 3y ago
That's ultimately why the loser of a civil case should be on the hook for all attorneys fees and court costs. I'd actually go further and argue that a plaintiff who initiates a frivolous lawsuit should have to pay damages to the victim for the losses caused by having to defend such a case.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_rule_(attorney%27s_fees) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_rule_(attorney%27s_fee... (this name is deceptive as it is basically the "every western democracy except the USA" rule)
- kmeisthax 3y agoCopyright in the US has an option for fee shifting. Usually it's loser pays, and there's limits on how much can be shifted, but there was a case where a zealously litigious photographer wound up being on the hook for the loser's attorney's fees because the loser had offered to settle the case for a reasonable amount early on, but the photographer thought they could get more money, which they didn't.