From: billw@ace.mentorg.com (Bill Wright)
Subject: Re: Law Suits!!
Originator: billw@ace
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:28:11 GMT
Organization: Mentor Graphics 
Keywords: 
Followup-To: 


In article <eric.721520600@milton>, eric@milton.u.washington.edu (Eric Hirst) writes:

|> A lot of the more outlandish lawsuits you have heard/read about have been
|> publicized with the help of the insurance companies who need to convince
|> the public that their jacked up rates are a result of evil lawyers and not
|> of their failed financial dealings in matters which have nothing to do with
|> insurance.  (E.g. real estate, I think, but I am not familiar with what they
|> are allowed to deal in.  I'm sure Bush would have had them playing the
|> ponies if he had been able to keep Lil' Danny running the show.)
Actually, the insurance companies do a lot better with their investments than
the S&Ls did.  That isn't the heart of the problem at all.  The insurance
business is a free market system.  If one company does bad with their 
investments then only their rates are going to rise.  Which ever company does
the best with their investments can offer the lowest rate.  People love to
point to the big bad insurance companies but that is not the problem.

|> Most of the outragous jury awards you've read about in the insurance company
|> ads were either a) overturned on appeal or threat thereof or b) the legitimate
|> result of some extenuating circumstance which gets left out of the version
|> of events that you or I read about in that insurance company ad.
Wrong.  Let's run down a few assinine law suits that amounted to BILLIONS
of dollars paid out for NO viable reason: Audi, Bendectin, electronic fetal
monitoring, traumatic cancer, Pitocin...  This is long.  Even in the cases
where the company was eventually vindicated they ended up spending a fortune
defending themselves (Merrill spent $100 million clearing itself of the
Bendectin stupidity.)  So stick your head in the sand if you want, but this
is a real problem that limits our freedom and costs us real money.  It also
costs us many lives, but we are drifting far off the subject.

|> Of course, there are loads of bogus lawsuits being filed, although I suspect
|> that a lot of them are a result of the filers' misguided believe that they
|> are about to win the lottery, a belief largely fueled by the insurance
|> companies' whining.
Wait.  The insurance companies are manipulating the press to think that these
law suits are all bogus, but the effect it has is inducing other people to
sue??  Now, doesn't this sound a bit like you have the conspiracy bug?

Sure there are many scumbag lawyers with incredible greed.  This is well
documented.  But if the system allows them to cash in then I don't think you
are going to solve the problem by hoping lawyers will all of a sudden get
a conscience.  I don't have the solution.  Tort reform is certainly a viable
option.  No other nation on earth approaches the US in lawyers per capita
or stupid litigation.  Maybe we should look at other systems (like the 
British system.)  I don't know.  It is complex.  It seems the real problem
is just stupid juries that fall for idiotic arguments and feel sorry for the
victim and think that the big, bad companies can afford it.  Frustrating...

|> 1) It means that in spite of the almost nonexistent record of successful
|> lawsuits by injured/killed climbers, landowners are rightfully scared
|> out of their drawers by the possible headaches that any lawsuit, successful
|> or otherwise, would entail. 
This is the real problem here.  The lawsuit doesn't have to be successful or
even have merit.  The threat of one is enough to take away our freedom.

|> (If anyone has a fairly complete knowledge
|> of a specific suit, an accurate and detailed description would be appreciated --
|> post said description or a reference to one.  The Chouinard case is the
|> only one I know of, and I haven't seen the complete details here or elsewhere.)
I don't know of any others involving climbing, but how many do you need?
The Chouinard case is enough to cause all the problems we have.

|> 2) I sure do like leading on camming devices sold in U.S. stores a lot more
|> than on the titanium clones a partner of mine bought from a recent emigree
|> from the not-so-litigious former Soviet Union.
Great and this should be a good differentiator on gear price, but shouldn't
we still have a choice?

Sorry about the diversion.  This doesn't really pretain much to climbing,
but it is a frustrating topic for me.  We are suppose to be such a free
nation, but in a lot of ways it seems we aren't free enough...  Anyway,
let's get back to talking about climbing!  

Anyone climbed Triassic Sands in Red Rocks? Yes, I know you have, Ken, 
but I was wondering if anyone else had an opinion on this climb.  I am
thinking about giving it a shot this Thanksgiving.

Bill
-- 
             Bill Wright / bill_wright@mentorg.com

                  "When in doubt, run it out!"