John Conyers: “First, we believe that fee-shifting provisions such as that in H.R. 988 are unfair, unnecessary, and unwise. That…”

“First, we believe that fee-shifting provisions such as that in H.R. 988 are unfair, unnecessary, and unwise. That provision would, with limited exceptions, require the court to order one party to pay attorney's fees of another if the former did not secure final judgment more favorable than offered by the latter. While such fee-shifting may be appropriate in some contexts, a blanket fee-shifting rule would work a significant injustice, particularly against parties that have fewer resources. Such a loser pays rule is alien to the American legal system, and we know of no empirical evidence that such a rule would address the primary problems facing our civil justice system, the slow pace and high costs of justice. I hope our colleagues will consider this as we move forward.”