It is a common idea that we Americans reside in a quite litigious culture.

Who hasn’t heard of the “frivolous” law suit of the lady who was severely burntby a cup of coffeefrom a fast food drive-thru? She went on to sue that fast food chain for the costs which arose from medically treating those burns.  She ended up receiving thousands and thousands of bucks in punitive damages.  (Punitive damages are damages awarded, beyond the extent of actual expenses with the intent to deter other folks from participating in similar conduct.  These contain damages awarded for pain and suffering).  Despite the fact that the appeals court significantly reduced the sum she obtained, this case brought a lot of media attention to the advocates of tort reform.

So you ask what is a tort? Also what is tort reform?  A tort is a civil criminal offense, in other words, an act which is illegal but not criminal.  The most common types of tort cases result from car mishaps.  Medical malpractice suits are also frequent torts. Other less frequent types of tort cases include those regarding product liability (an illustration of which would be defective consumer products), defamation, false imprisonment and nuisance violations.  Tort reform pertains to the group of legal guidelines intended to alter the way the civil court process works.  Some of the objectives of the reform aim to limit the time which an hurt party can find legal action (in most states, including Virginia, the “statute of limitations” is two yrs), to make it more difficult for an injured person to obtain a jury trial and to reduce the volume of money awarded to the hurt party.

Opponents to tort reform, sometimes calling it “tort deform”, declare that reforming tort legal guidelines only safeguards big companies and health professionals and hospitals.  It serves to keep settlements modest and private and therefore places the “financial well-being” of physicians, hospitals and corporate America over the “physical well-being” of patients and consumers.

In the situation of that 79-year old woman who was scolded by the cup of jo- what most of the public is unaware of is that the fast food chain in question was serving coffee at 190 degrees.  In the 10 years prior to this case, seven-hundred other people were burnt by the cup of jo.  Regardless of many requests, the restuarant refused to lower the heat and didn’t do so until the day after the verdict was announced.  In this situation, justice was served.  This was not “frivolous” as tort reform advocates would preferyou to think.

It is becoming more difficult to retain expert attorneys who will represent you.  This is because attorneys who specialize in personal injury law (which contains tort cases) generally accept cases on what is known as a “contingency fee” basis.  That means that only if they win will they acquire a percentage of the award as their fee. If they lose, they do not obtain payment for their services. Trial costs for tort cases in particular againstbig companies, can be expensive.  If you’ve been hurt and need an attorney, look for a Roanoke law firm with knowledge.

For a nation whose citizens ordinarily root for the underdog, it is ironic that so many support tort reform.