Ah, okay, I see what you were doing. I didn’t “get” that the parenthetical was a direct repeat of the poor info given on that 6:20 broadcast. Sorry. My bad.
I do like your take on the proper place of a well-founded tort case. There really IS a need, but the difficulty arises in determining how to delineate between a case seeking reasonable damages, and a case that is abusive of the system. I can feature that cases commonly arise that could be made to sound like they were abusive, but, if all the facts were known, truly wouldn’t be.
I probably could have been a bit more clear about that parenthetical comment. I should have put a “/sarcasm” after it. :>)