Interestingly enough, there was rider on a relatively recent Texas bill (the principal bill was for the unremarkable right to establish seperate dockets for unimpaired asbestos plaintiffs) that would have permitted asbestos defendants to seek recovery of fees and expenses from the plaintiffs.
An amazingly bone-headed political move (I'm sure you can hear in the background the shouts of "picking on the victims to line the pockets of the evil corporations"). Not surprisingly, the entire bill died in committee.
Interestingly enough, there was rider on a relatively recent Texas bill (the principal bill was for the unremarkable right to establish seperate dockets for unimpaired asbestos plaintiffs) that would have permitted asbestos defendants to seek recovery of fees and expenses from the plaintiffs.
An amazingly bone-headed political move (I'm sure you can hear in the background the shouts of "picking on the victims to line the pockets of the evil corporations"). Not surprisingly, the entire bill died in committee.
That's too bad; the principle seems sound enough. Of course I don't know anything about this particular proposal and I might not have agreed with its specifics. (For example, if it made recovery of legal fees and costs too easy, I might have thought it was too strong a disincentive to financially strapped plaintiffs. On the other hand, I'm not a tort lawyer and my opinion on this subject doesn't involve any particular expertise.) But the idea seems to be an improvement over leaving the costs where they fall.
What about plaintiffs' recovering of their fees and costs from losing defendants? Was that also part of the proposal, or does Texas law already allow that?