I would agree it stimulates negotiation. Let me say that the concern I have is that the difference between the Michigan rule that the gentleman is articulating very accurately here and the bill, as it is currently drafted, is that under the current circumstances only when the Plaintiff meets or exceeds the amount of their demand will they get attorney fees. Only when the defendant keeps the plaintiff below the amount of their settlement offer will the defendant get attorney fees, and in the area in between that $50,000 to $100,000 no one, no party, pays the other party's attorney fees as the bill is written. I say to the gentleman, ``You would make it razor sharp by saying, if it's 75 thousand and one dollar, the plaintiff prevails, and the defendant pays his attorney fees. if it's $75,999, the defendant prevails, and the plaintiff pays his attorney fees,'' and I really don't think the merit of whether or not a case was reasonable ought to fall on one dollar. That can never happen.
On the recordMarch 6, 1995
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing concerns about attorney fees in relation to a proposed bill.
Share
More from Bob Goodlatte
Jul 18, 2022
I think a great first step would be to pass the Fourth Amendment's Not For Sale Act that's been introduced by Chair Nadler.
Jul 18, 2022
Our very country was born out of anger and fear of what a government can do to people when it doesn't respect their privacy.
Jul 18, 2022
the more opportunities that the consumer has to decide for themselves whether or not they want to make certain information available to Google or other companies and control how Google might utilize that information, the better.
Jul 18, 2022
I think that it would be appropriate for the Congress to look at data collection practices beyond the scope of what this Committee is looking at here today.





