So they could have limited this bill to frivolous and fraudulent cases but instead, as a way of discouraging even legitimate suits that sometimes, of course, in a court in front of a judge and a jury could go either way, if someone takes a chance thinking they have got a good suit but they lose, it is not a frivolous suit, it is not a fraudulent suit, but when the jury weighs the evidence, they conclude that it does not have merit, that they are going to have imposed upon them the cost of some large concern in defending that suit and they could actually have the wages garnished, perhaps a car taken away, all kinds of things.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of a bill on legitimate lawsuits.
Share
More from Lloyd Doggett
If this racially gerrymandered Trump map is rejected, as it should be, I will continue seeking reelection in Congressional District 37 to represent my neighbors in the only town I have ever called home.
I believe Americans are ready to defend our democracy and oppose authoritarianism so that we can celebrate our 251st birthday in this country instead of turning all power over to a would-be king.
we all mourn the loss from the tragic attack on two National Guard members here in Washington last week. Yet, once again, the master of distraction seeks to avoid any accountability for his role in this tragedy. Only 7 months earlier, the…
Trump has made clear his priorities, accepting ruthless suppression by Maduro's comrades so long as the oil profits flow to him as the self-described acting President of Venezuela. With one major oil company describing the country as…





