Tort Reform

Share

There are lots of people who think that suing is the best way to get justice. The trouble is that in doing so, they frequently hurt many other innocent people along the way who had nothing to do with it whatsoever. A close friend of mine advised me, when I was wronged, to "seek only that remedy that will remove the problem", and a leader in my Faith advised me to "seek justice without vindictiveness". My attorney's advice was perhaps the most useful and enlightening. He told me, "If you decide to sue, I could use the money, but you will have better peace of mind if you just let it go."

A Supreme Court decision today reaffirmed my faith in justice. After years of complaints and appeal, and amidst a lot of emotional fervor, the court rejected a class action female lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores Inc. I was happy to see these justices aware that Aristotle reminds us that the law is "reason free from passion". Even if the people wronged were indeed wronged, this is about passion, and when that door swings, it swings very wide ajar and is often difficult to close.

Part of the problem with this type of lawsuit is that it treats everyone equally in an attempt to correct inequity. However, there are probably people in this lawsuit who were not actually harmed who joined in because they can stick it to the man and get money from this very wealthy corporation. In fact, I have also been solicited to join in on a class-action against Wal-Mart for improperly paid overtime, but I know that I was adequately and honestly compensated according to company policy, and my conscience will be clear abstaining from the litigation. The company did not do this to people. People did this to people.

When you attack something large, you inadvertantly hurt other people. Take for instance law suits against the government. Who pays that? Not the officials who hurt the complaintant. TAXPAYERS fit the bill, people who may not even know who you are, let alone wish you ill. The practical application of a lawsuit against Wal-Mart is that it will hurt other hourly associates, other managers who were ethical, and everyone who shops there, because Wal-Mart will adjust pricing to compensate for the loss. In other words, these women want every single one of you to pay for an injustice done to them by a few or the one.

A sweeping 9-0 decision, as uncommon a result as possible, accepted Wal-Mart's argument that these were too dissimilar to be lumped together. Individual actions require individual investigation. There is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all approach to justice, and what some of these people claim will probably turn out to not be justice at all were the court to grant the request. Perhaps you have forgotten the Duke LaCrosse case? You can read about it here. Just because someone alleges something does not make it true.

What we really need is some tort reform. There is very little if any cost to the complainants in class action suits, and yet they stand to earn from $3 to $3,000,000 apiece for the claim. That's a marvelous return on investment for a little time and a little lie. If, for example, you could only sue for the amount of personal liability coverage you actually carried, that might dissuade some of these professional slip and fall clients from such shenanigans, like this fictitious one that comes to mind.

Truth eventually wins in the end. You do not usually need to sue to get justice. All that really brings you is money, which isn't always enough let alone useful to set things right.

We'll close with this song from John Batdorf called "Let it Go". When people hurt me, I listen to it, and I have so far always followed his advice.