Political Quotes

“the amendment I have proposed with my esteemed colleague from Kentucky would extend the joint liability reforms of S. 565 to all cases whose subject matter affects interstate commerce. This extension is necessary, in our view, to realize the basic goals of the bill. In its traditional form, the doctrine of joint liability allows the plaintiff to collect the entire amount of a judgment from any defendant found to be at least partially responsible for the plaintiff's damages. Thus, for example, a defendant found to be 1 percent responsible for the plaintiff's damages could be forced to pay 100 percent of the plaintiff's judgment. This example is not merely theoretical. In the case of Walt Disney World versus Wood, the plaintiff sought recovery of damages resulting from a collision between her go-kart and another driven by her fiancee. The jury found the plaintiff 14 percent responsible, and her fiancee 85 percent responsible, for the plaintiff's damages. Thus, between them, the plaintiff and her fiancee were 99 percent responsible for her damages. Unfortunately for Disney, however, the jury found it 1 percent responsible for the plaintiff's damages and, under the doctrine of joint liability, Disney was forced to pay 86 percent of the plaintiff's judgment. The Disney case underscores the fact that unreformed joint liability forces defendants to pay judgments on the basis of their resources, not their responsibility.”