One thing in this argument today, we have come up with the idea that plaintiffs are always poor and defendants are always rich. That is far from the truth. A plaintiff can pick a forum, he can file in the Federal court if there is diversity, he can bring the defendant where the defendant never wants to go. There are lots of defendants who are worth modest sums of money who could be totally destroyed by the action itself being filed against him. Then to say that he does not have a right in frivolous cases or under circumstances where there is no good cause to get his attorneys' fees back, he is left penniless anyway.
William Moorhead: “One thing in this argument today, we have come up with the idea that plaintiffs are always poor and defendants are…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the financial dynamics between plaintiffs and defendants in legal cases.
Share
More from William Moorhead
Senior U.S. District Judge Milton Shadur of the northern district of Illinois said he generally would welcome the restoration of the old rule. "The most recent changes watered it down," he says, "by offering an out for lawyers who get…
I understand that, and I did comment on that in my comments, that you come to another argument when you go into that. You lead to further litigation and dispute as to whether the offer has been reasonable or unreasonable, many other things…
Activation may include getting the different parts of the operating system through the RAM. Because the entire operating system may not entirely fit into the RAM, activation may proceed through a series of steps until the entire operating…
But actually it applies to both the defendant and the plaintiff. The plaintiff is not the only one that could be caught paying the other person's fees. But I can tell the gentleman that you can limit the amount of money you may have to pay…





