[bigeasy_70118]

Loser pays assumes equal bargaining power between the two parties. $25,000 for an insurance company is a drop in the bucket. $25,000 to someone who has been injured in an accident and loses due to a technicality or a bad lawyer is devastating.

[Bluntpoint]

Statistically, the loser pays dimension will favor plaintiffs far more than it will not, which is why you’ve seen it drop off the tort reform radar screen.

For the average person, this is a better system. It makes it hard for corporations to try and bully individuals when their legal case is pretty shaky.

[Bluntpoint]

The most likely outcome of a loser-pays rule is a system that allows insurance provided by the plaintiffs' law firms, which are in the best position to judge their client's chances of ultimately being responsible for fees and costs.

In cases where a firm is confident of some measure of success, it might offer to loan the client the money for fee insurance, with the plaintiff only required to pay back the loan if the plaintiff recovers damages.

Under either scenario, an additional benefit is that the plaintiff's law firm would have a strong incentive not to run up the defendant's legal bills unnecessarily.

[Bluntpoint]

The loser pays system encourages both parties to make an accurate assessment of the value of the case and to make a reasonable settlement.

[Bluntpoint]

Loser pays assumes equal bargaining power between the two parties. $25,000 for an insurance company is a drop in the bucket. $25,000 to someone who has been injured in an accident and loses due to a technicality or a bad lawyer is devastating.

In fact, overall the loser-pays rule is likely to discourage improper conduct by defendants. Currently, defendants who are aware of their liability sometimes purposely delay matters to coerce a reduced settlement from injured plaintiffs who desperately need compensation.

Under a loser-pays system, if the defendant ultimately lost the case, it would bear not only all of its own costs, but also a hefty chunk of whatever extra burdens it placed on the plaintiff.

The loser-pays rule also helps plaintiffs with legitimate claims by making small claims economically viable. Loser-pays ensures that defendants, not plaintiffs, will be financially responsible for any legal action taken to deny a legitimate claim.

Moreover, a loser-pays system is ethically superior to the current system. A defendant who has been dragged into litigation and had his property put in jeopardy deserves compensation for any expenditures made in defeating an invalid claim. Conversely, a plaintiff who has a valid claim should recover full damages, including the legal fees paid in defeating the recalcitrant defendant.