I generally agree with the article, but it gets one thing wrong. It says: the evidence does not show an epidemic of frivolous lawsuits winning jackpots

I generally agree with the article, but it gets one thing wrong. It says: the evidence does not show an epidemic of frivolous lawsuits winning jackpots My counterexample is patent trolls availing themselves of the hospitality of the "United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas".