[SedVictaCatoni]

I am a plaintiff in a case involving supposed overcharges by American Express. I get $3.00. The lawyers got 8 million. Screw-um.

On the other hand, it's not like you did any of the work in the lawsuit to recover the overcharge.

[Southack]

"On the other hand, it's not like you did any of the work in the lawsuit to recover the overcharge."

He'll be paying larger fees as that company raises rates to pay its litigation costs, though.

$3 also fails to give him any incentive to support the trial lawyers in their efforts to raise the cost of doing business.

He got $3, the attorneys got $8 million. Well, the guy who got $3 but now has to pay higher costs to use that same business might just want to see a disincentive applied such that attorneys weren't so anxious to try such cases.

[MindBender26]

>On the other hand, it's not like you did any of the work in the lawsuit to recover the overcharge.

Exactly. Anytime one is rewarded for doing nothing, problems insue.

[WmDonovan]

"I am a plaintiff in a case involving supposed overcharges by American Express. I get $3.00. The lawyers got 8 million. Screw-um."

"On the other hand, it's not like you did any of the work in the lawsuit to recover the overcharge."

If the "award" to the plaintiffs was going to be that paltry then why bother? The point is that the looting lawyers couldn't care less about the plaintiffs, they are just a necessary evil as far as they are concerned. The lawyers just raised phone rates for everyone.

These cases are random, and it is more about who has deep pockets than who did anything wrong. Businesses call it "the cost of doing business" and simply charge consumers more to cover it. The only incentive that is created for business is to do business elsewhere, and that means more jobs leaving the country. The lawyers get rich and are ultimately paid by the consumers they are so piously claiming to protect. No wonder they are the heros of the Democrats: they screw every body and get rich in the process.