"Schools are largely insulated from lawsuits..."
Schools should make school safe for children by teaching students and adults better ways to deal with problems. Instead, schools give away taxpayer dollars to lawyers and insurance companies to cover up wrongdoing and mistakes.
More families are taking school bullies to court
Feb. 17, 2006 San Diego Union Tribune
Click HERE to see the original article.
Excerpts:
More families are taking school bullies to court
By Chris Seper
NEWHOUSE NEWS SERVICE
February 17, 2006
School bullies who get a trip to the principal's office could also find themselves in front of a judge.
More parents whose children are beaten or bullied are suing their attackers' families or schools, according to court filings and experts on school violence. Some want money to pay for broken noses or more severe injuries. Others hope a lawsuit provides a sense of justice they didn't get from criminal trials and school discipline.
Violence-prevention centers also are hearing from more parents about whether to take schools and bullies' families to court.
“A lot of parents who take steps to a civil case believe the criminal justice system didn't work,” said William Lassiter, manager for North Carolina's Center for the Prevention of School Violence, one of the country's first school-safety agencies.
The center received one or two calls a week from concerned parents before the 1999 Columbine school shootings. Now it gets about a half-dozen daily. About a quarter of those callers eventually discuss a lawsuit because police and school officials didn't help them, Lassiter said.
“Somebody has got to get serious about this,” said Mike Duitch, whose family lost a suit in 2001 against the city schools in Canton, Ohio. Duitch's son, Nathan, was badly beaten by a group of students during his freshman year, an incident that the Duitches said was part of a school-sanctioned day of hazing.
No one – from the FBI to the U.S. Department of Education to anti-bullying advocates – tracks school violence lawsuits, but anecdotal evidence and interviews suggest civil courts are wading into these murky conflicts as the country focuses more on bullying.
Rachel Mertz tormented Emma Silverblatt during eighth grade at Mayfield High School, according to the Silverblatt family's lawsuit in Cuyahoga County (Ohio) Common Pleas Court. Emma, who is Jewish, said Rachel would threaten her and use anti-Semitic insults.
But Rachel, who like Emma was 13 at the time, told police that Emma called her names and regularly slapped her when they rode the school bus. Neither girl told the school, and each denies picking on the other.
Rachel confronted Emma at Emma's second-floor locker one afternoon in March 2004, the suit said. Emma tried to move Rachel out of the way and Rachel grabbed Emma by the hair. Rachel told police that Emma started kicking her.
Then Rachel dragged Emma to the ground, punched her and banged her head against the school's tile floor several times, calling out insults as she hit her, according to a Mayfield police report and the lawsuit.
Mayfield High suspended Rachel for five days, and she left the school soon after. Cuyahoga County Juvenile Court ordered her to mediation, a type of court counseling meant to work through youth problems.
The Silverblatts want $50,000 for their daughter's head and neck injuries, blurred vision and mental anguish, which required “extensive medical care,” according to the suit, which is pending. However, Emma Silverblatt's main purpose in suing is that “the community have an opportunity to hear what happened,” said her attorney, Robert F. DiCello.
The Mertzes' attorneys did not return phone calls seeking comment, nor did Denise Striker, Rachel Mertz's mother. The Silverblatt family declined to comment.
A settlement hearing is scheduled for March.
Child advocates don't think civil lawsuits would deter future fights or bullying.
There would be less litigation and a better long-term result if schools and juvenile systems created programs that gave attacked students a sense of justice, said Lassiter...
Showing posts with label law suit abuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label law suit abuse. Show all posts
Friday, January 11, 2008
Friday, January 04, 2008
CALA: Lawsuit abuse by those who claim to oppose lawsuit abuse
Click HERE to see the original post.
Organizations like CALA (Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse) want defense attorneys to soak up tax dollars, litigating cases against plaintiffs who have been wrongfully damaged.
These cases shouldn't be litigated, they should be settled.
But then the CALA lawyers wouldn't be paid, would they?
But CALA lawyers don't just want to get paid, they also want to win so insurance companies will keep hiring them.
So they go on a propaganda campaign against plaintiffs.
Insurance companies and their lawyers don't care who gets hurt or how many laws are violated, they just want to make sure that juries don't give money to plaintiffs.
Here's an article that describes the situation:
North County Times
San Diego
October 12, 2003
By:SCOTT MARSHALL - Staff Writer
VISTA ---- Playing off California's recent recall election, Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse held an online election last week to "recall" what it described as "crazy" lawsuits and to draw public awareness to the issue of frivolous lawsuits.
Some local attorneys dispute whether any lawsuit abuse problem exists and say national statistics back up their position that it does not.
While the opponents say laws need to be changed so the judicial system protects legitimate victims and businesses, some attorneys contend that the marketing effort to promote the concept of lawsuit abuse already has adversely affected those seeking justice in civil courts...
Chris Hulburt, the president-elect of Consumer Attorneys of San Diego, said the numbers cited by the groups to support their claims of a "lawsuit tax" have no basis in fact. No data exists to back up those contentions, Hulburt said.
"It's just nonsense," Hulburt said. "It's a marketing campaign."
Hulburt said that during the last 10 to 20 years statistics have shown that the number of civil lawsuits filed nationwide has steadily declined and that almost half the lawsuits filed involved businesses suing other businesses rather than cases of individuals seeking money for personal injuries or property damage.
"I think that there is no problem," Hulburt said. "I think it's something that big business has created as a massive marketing campaign that there's some crisis."
A National Center for State Courts report stated that the number of tort cases ---- which include personal injury, defamation and malpractice lawsuits ---- filed in 16 states, including California, rose 75 percent from 1973 to 1990, but have declined continually from 1990 to 2001.
The same report stated that combined figures from those 16 states and 14 others showed a 9 percent decline in the number of tort cases filed from 1992 to 2001.
In San Diego County, however, court cases have climbed in recent years: Court statistics showed that the number of civil lawsuits filed in almost all categories increased each year from the 1998-99 fiscal year to the 2001-02 fiscal year.
Statewide, lawsuits involving property damages, personal injury and wrongful death also have increased in number each year, but the total number of new lawsuits statewide involving more than $25,000 declined from 2000-01 to 2001-02.
Hulburt said some that of the lawsuits include businesses suing businesses and that the data showing increases locally should be compared to population increases in the county. Kotner said the figures show the problem is real.
Is 'reform' possible?
"It indicates that there is lawsuit abuse and we need to reform the system," Kotner said. "We need meaningful changes."
Laws need to be fair, Kotner said, and to provide protection for legitimate victims as well as for businesses.
Striking that balance may not be possible, said Nicholas Pace, a researcher at the Rand Institute for Civil Justice.
"Is there a way to filter out all the really bad cases and not filter out the legitimate cases?" Pace said. "No. There is no perfect system. ... I know when I see a case of lawsuit abuse, but it's difficult to write up a law that describes that and nothing else."
Hulburt and Escondido attorney Carla Dedominicis said the justice system already contains checks to prevent cases without merit from going forward and that campaigns to draw attention to lawsuit abuse already have made it harder for legitimate clients to obtain justice.
"There hasn't been a jury that's been picked in recent years where somebody hasn't expressed a disdain for frivolous lawsuits," Dedominicis said.
Hulburt said every lawyer has seen the same problem in the last five to 10 years because the lawsuit abuse campaign has successfully put the idea of lawsuit abuse in people's minds.
"It's a completely different environment in the courtroom, and it's much more difficult for a legitimate victim to get fair compensation," Hulburt said...
Organizations like CALA (Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse) want defense attorneys to soak up tax dollars, litigating cases against plaintiffs who have been wrongfully damaged.
These cases shouldn't be litigated, they should be settled.
But then the CALA lawyers wouldn't be paid, would they?
But CALA lawyers don't just want to get paid, they also want to win so insurance companies will keep hiring them.
So they go on a propaganda campaign against plaintiffs.
Insurance companies and their lawyers don't care who gets hurt or how many laws are violated, they just want to make sure that juries don't give money to plaintiffs.
Here's an article that describes the situation:
North County Times
San Diego
October 12, 2003
By:SCOTT MARSHALL - Staff Writer
VISTA ---- Playing off California's recent recall election, Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse held an online election last week to "recall" what it described as "crazy" lawsuits and to draw public awareness to the issue of frivolous lawsuits.
Some local attorneys dispute whether any lawsuit abuse problem exists and say national statistics back up their position that it does not.
While the opponents say laws need to be changed so the judicial system protects legitimate victims and businesses, some attorneys contend that the marketing effort to promote the concept of lawsuit abuse already has adversely affected those seeking justice in civil courts...
Chris Hulburt, the president-elect of Consumer Attorneys of San Diego, said the numbers cited by the groups to support their claims of a "lawsuit tax" have no basis in fact. No data exists to back up those contentions, Hulburt said.
"It's just nonsense," Hulburt said. "It's a marketing campaign."
Hulburt said that during the last 10 to 20 years statistics have shown that the number of civil lawsuits filed nationwide has steadily declined and that almost half the lawsuits filed involved businesses suing other businesses rather than cases of individuals seeking money for personal injuries or property damage.
"I think that there is no problem," Hulburt said. "I think it's something that big business has created as a massive marketing campaign that there's some crisis."
A National Center for State Courts report stated that the number of tort cases ---- which include personal injury, defamation and malpractice lawsuits ---- filed in 16 states, including California, rose 75 percent from 1973 to 1990, but have declined continually from 1990 to 2001.
The same report stated that combined figures from those 16 states and 14 others showed a 9 percent decline in the number of tort cases filed from 1992 to 2001.
In San Diego County, however, court cases have climbed in recent years: Court statistics showed that the number of civil lawsuits filed in almost all categories increased each year from the 1998-99 fiscal year to the 2001-02 fiscal year.
Statewide, lawsuits involving property damages, personal injury and wrongful death also have increased in number each year, but the total number of new lawsuits statewide involving more than $25,000 declined from 2000-01 to 2001-02.
Hulburt said some that of the lawsuits include businesses suing businesses and that the data showing increases locally should be compared to population increases in the county. Kotner said the figures show the problem is real.
Is 'reform' possible?
"It indicates that there is lawsuit abuse and we need to reform the system," Kotner said. "We need meaningful changes."
Laws need to be fair, Kotner said, and to provide protection for legitimate victims as well as for businesses.
Striking that balance may not be possible, said Nicholas Pace, a researcher at the Rand Institute for Civil Justice.
"Is there a way to filter out all the really bad cases and not filter out the legitimate cases?" Pace said. "No. There is no perfect system. ... I know when I see a case of lawsuit abuse, but it's difficult to write up a law that describes that and nothing else."
Hulburt and Escondido attorney Carla Dedominicis said the justice system already contains checks to prevent cases without merit from going forward and that campaigns to draw attention to lawsuit abuse already have made it harder for legitimate clients to obtain justice.
"There hasn't been a jury that's been picked in recent years where somebody hasn't expressed a disdain for frivolous lawsuits," Dedominicis said.
Hulburt said every lawyer has seen the same problem in the last five to 10 years because the lawsuit abuse campaign has successfully put the idea of lawsuit abuse in people's minds.
"It's a completely different environment in the courtroom, and it's much more difficult for a legitimate victim to get fair compensation," Hulburt said...
Is this why Carl Cohn is leaving in disgust? CALA works to make sure that school money goes to lawyers, not students and employees
Defense lawyers for school districts are bleeding taxpayers dry, instead of telling districts to obey the law and settle cases of wrongdoing before litigation begins, WHICH WOULD RESULT IN A HUGE NET SAVINGS FOR SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
Ironically, these facts are twisted by defense lawyers who work with organizations like CALA (Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse) to bring about legislation to limit just payments to injured students and employees harmed by wrongful actions.
But at the same time, these individuals work TO KEEP UNLIMITED TAX DOLLARS FLOWING TO SCHOOL DEFENSE LAWYERS and the insurance companies who employ them.
The San Diego Union Tribune, with its usual slanted reporting, states in today's paper, "San Diego city schools spent $1.4 million on verdicts and settlements and $3.2 million on outside counsel in fiscal 2005, according to the [CALA] report. That money could have purchased 1.8 million packs of crayons."
What the San Diego Union Tribune article doesn't say:
The entire $3.2 million wasted on ouside counsel for San Diego schools could almost certainly have been saved if the $1.4 million of payouts had been spent on settlements to injured parties BEFORE the lawsuits were ever filed.
This is what the tort claims act is supposed to accomplish: to give public entities a chance to settle claims before they are filed in court.
But the insurance companies who have their hands deep into the pockets of school districts instruct schools to deny ALL tort claims.
Insurance companies want tax money to go to them, instead of students and employees who have been harmed, even though they have to violate the law to do it. This is how law firms like Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz and Parham & Rajcic obtain millions of dollars meant for kids and teachers and administrators.
Ironically, these facts are twisted by defense lawyers who work with organizations like CALA (Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse) to bring about legislation to limit just payments to injured students and employees harmed by wrongful actions.
But at the same time, these individuals work TO KEEP UNLIMITED TAX DOLLARS FLOWING TO SCHOOL DEFENSE LAWYERS and the insurance companies who employ them.
The San Diego Union Tribune, with its usual slanted reporting, states in today's paper, "San Diego city schools spent $1.4 million on verdicts and settlements and $3.2 million on outside counsel in fiscal 2005, according to the [CALA] report. That money could have purchased 1.8 million packs of crayons."
What the San Diego Union Tribune article doesn't say:
The entire $3.2 million wasted on ouside counsel for San Diego schools could almost certainly have been saved if the $1.4 million of payouts had been spent on settlements to injured parties BEFORE the lawsuits were ever filed.
This is what the tort claims act is supposed to accomplish: to give public entities a chance to settle claims before they are filed in court.
But the insurance companies who have their hands deep into the pockets of school districts instruct schools to deny ALL tort claims.
Insurance companies want tax money to go to them, instead of students and employees who have been harmed, even though they have to violate the law to do it. This is how law firms like Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz and Parham & Rajcic obtain millions of dollars meant for kids and teachers and administrators.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)