Has anyone ever heard of the Tort Reform?
912464
The Tort Reform is unconstitutional because it removes any liability of the physician from being a subject of a complaint.  The physician if negligent must be sued in court, otherwise, the patient will be helpless if not given this right.
1084661
Yes I have heard of this, and it scares me. The ignorance in this question is astounding. It's time for people to get over their apathy and denial and start paying attention to what is going on here. I've been saying for the last two months that this whole "immigration reform" treadmill debate and "bill" is nothing more than blanket amnesty and a thinly vieled way to open our borders wide up. And now not only is the truth coming out, but it's FAR worse than I even thought it would be.\n\nPresident Bush, with NO Congressional authority or public disclosure, signed the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America along with the president of Mexico and the Prime Minister of Canada. The plan is to effectively MERGE Canada, Mexico, and the United States into one super-state with an "common security perimeter." It's RIGHT there, hidden in plain site, on our own government website (http://www.spp.gov/).\n\nThousands of homes are going to be illegally seized, citing 'imminent domain,' for a massive North American super-highway that will eventually stretch from Alaska, through Canada, as far South as Chile (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Texas_Corridor). It's going to be controlled by international corporations, and patrolled by International police.\n\nNorth American Union law and the North American Supreme Court are going to SUPERCEDE our own court systems.\n\nREAD the Council on Foreign Relations plan, which is already being implemented:\n\nhttp://www.cfr.org/publication/8102/\n\nThey call for all three countries to be fully integrated by 2010, and they also call for an additional "North American Tax" on EVERY  working citizen.\n\nOur ancestors DIED for American Sovereignty, and without telling Congree, and without the support of the American people, our government is giving that sovereignty away in the name of bullshit "national security," massive corporations, cheap labor, and world control.\n\nCanadians should be equally horrified of this.\n\nYour Prime Minister, Stepher Harper, is in bed SO deeply with the Bush Adminstration, the CFR, and mega-corporations that it's just downright scary.\n\nCanada even had their own recent bullshit "terror scare."\n\n17 "extremists" planned to blow up Toronto and behead the beloved Prime Minister.\n\nThey were arrested and not allowed to speak to anybody.\n\nThe Canadian government spent two weeks talking about their evil plan, with no real evidence to back it up.\n\nThen what happens?\n\nNews starts getting out that the case against these men is awful.\n\nWhat does Canada do?\n\nThey BAN the media, under threat of prison, from even mentioning the case.\n\nThe trial will be held in a secret location under a Canadian government tribunal, with their own hand-picked 'jurors" -- and the media will not be allowed access to any of it (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyid=2006-06-13T001750Z_01_N12227558_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-CANADA.xml&src=rss)\n\nWhat will it take for people to end their denial and wake up to what's going on around us?\n\nAmerica, and soon the entire continent, is falling to straight-up tyranny.\n\nAnd because our government is hand-in-hand with the corporate mainstream media, everyone assumes it's not happening.\n\nOpen your history books.\n\nThis is nothing new.\n\nIt has happened time and time and time again throughout history, and it's happening as we speak.\n\nYour choices are simple:\n\n1) Educate yourself, and do EVERYTHING in your power to let others know what is going on.\n2) Maintain an "I'll believe it when I see it" attitude, and finally be convinced when it's too late to change things.\n\nAnd it's pretty obvious what will probably happen next.\n\nThe United States is going to be hit by another massive "terrorist attack," maybe multiple attacks at the same time, and then FEMA
106351
The law is set up so that people can get a fair trial through the decisions of a jury of your peers, however I am not sure that it has ever been the case. Trials that I have been involved with hasn't seemed very fair to me.
1121538
yes......such as medical, trespass, insurance? what exactly do you need to know?\na TORT is a civil wrong for which the victim receives compensation in the forms of damages.
666638
no, never heard of it, think its a scam\n\ndef a scam, found this website with a copy of the email
785700
I've heard of cases where someone was injured at a business they owned and ended up having to hire a lawyer to sue his own business so the insurance company would pay up.  Weird.
931953
Yes, I do recall that, but like you, I haven't heard anything much about it of late either.\n\nThe place to enquire would probably be The Office of Fair Trading, as I think they were involved in it.
676835
Nope! It hasn't. However, it is a HUGE liability issue.
810197
You don't say who made this request to the Coucil and in what circumstances.  It sounds as though the Council is being gently prodded to think things through and perhaps withdraw an action to recover what is owed on the grounds that the person is somewhat deranged or mentally handicapped.  Those hearing the case can't say such a thing outright, but they can drop loud hints to the effect that if a person isn't in a fit mental state to deal with his financial affairs, it is perhaps not a good thing to bring him to court, especially if he is arguing with deep conviction that he doesn't understand why he is being prosecuted and doesn't feel he owes anything.  Maybe now that we are not allowed to use Latin in court, "moral culpability" is the new "mens rea".
1128991
I've not heard of this.\n\nI would think it would be BIG NEWS.
542397
Haven't heard of it. I checked Google and there is nothing.
356665
Nope, wow I haven't realy heard of it.....
498324
Barristral Immunity is becoming a issue: In commonwealth countries there is a tendency to say no immunity in civil cases in negligent preparation. The real issue is that : whether it would run the risk of double jeopardy. Its very hard to see the differences between a lawyer and other professional persons. Again this is a negligence issue and there is a general shift away from such immunity. Personally I'm all for it, not because its fair but because I'm a law student and it is in my best interest to keep it.
1138655
I am not a lawyer.  I seem to remember hearing this:\n\n            The law is on the Old System.  Most lawyers now are\n            (functioning) on the New System.  That is why a lot of \n            lawyers appear to not be doing a very good job.\n\nThink about it or ask someone about it.  Find out what it takes to get on the System.  How does getting on the System affect one's thinking and reasoning pattern as well as an individual's conduct?\nI am not sure exactly where I heard the above remark, but I seem to recall hearing it from someone who would be some kind of legitimate authority on lawyers.\n\nOf course, it is bad to taint them all with the same brush.  Honest lawyers do exist, I am sure, and they have the potential to do a lot of good if they got to where they are in an upright way without different forms of theft.  However, I think that lawyers of this genre are few and far between, and they generally function from inside an arena of thieves.  They are very rare birds nowdays I think.  A definite need for honest lawyers exists today.\n\n"We're expected to give bad advice some of the time (to pay back the System)" - lawyer quotation I seem to vaguely recall overhearing.\n\nAlso, clients who put lawyers up to certain forms of behaviour can be just as callous (e.g. divorce and child custody suits when one spouse wants to get back at the other).
760134
I've never heard that. I live in Ontario. However my workplace does offer that service as part of the benefits package so likely others do too.
622086
I never heard of it but it sounds like a good law
968104
Hi Violet.\n\nWhat area of tort were you reading about? I don't have this particular book as it is too far out of date.\n\nThere must be some context in which importance was attached to what was said, perhaps a reference to some precident or case?