Jack Fields: “since we spent most of today talking about intent, let us talk about what our intent is in this pleadings section. Let…”

“since we spent most of today talking about intent, let us talk about what our intent is in this pleadings section. Let us also talk about what the effect is of our pleadings section. Does the legislation as it is currently drafted, and particularly the pleadings section as it is currently drafted, bar a plaintiff or plaintiff class harmed by an untrue statement or material omission which was knowingly made and relied upon? Absolutely not. In fact, we believe that the specificity of the pleading of facts required in this legislation should promote faster recovery at lower plaintiff cost; that the plaintiff should actually see a higher return when those type lawsuits are brought. But it is important again to point to the facts, to constantly point to the facts that small and medium-sized companies alone have paid out nearly $500 million during the last 2 years, and we all recognize that settling a case is oftentimes cheaper and quicker than defending in court, and the problem is getting worse. In the last 5 years the number of strike suits have tripled. The intent here is to stop the frivolous lawsuit, to stop the fishing expedition.”