A seventh person has died as the result of the outdoor stage collapse at the Indiana State Fair. Families of two of the victims have already sued. If all seven sued, that means the state would be out only $4.9 million, because we're one of the states that has aggressively tried to limit the proliferation of lawsuits:
Indiana caps the state's liability in accidents at $700,000 per person and $5 million total per event, amounts that personal-injury lawyers say are too low in a situation involving so many victims. Six people have died from their injuries, including one Friday, and roughly four dozen more were hurt, many seriously.
Legal experts said that could result in several other entities aside from the state fair becoming targets of negligence lawsuits, including the designer and builder of the stage and the concert promoter.
The goals of tort reform, among others to unclog the courts of friviolous lawsuits and to reduce costs, especially medical ones, are worthwhile, although I think the individual limits are more justifiable than the collective liability. Why should someone involved in an accident get less merely because there are more people to divide the money among?
Studies are mixed when it comes to whether reforms have actually had the desired effects; I suppose it's one of those "you see evidence of what you were looking for" things.
My attitude about lawsuits in general changed somewhat when I felt I had to resort to one after a car wreck nearly 30 years ago. It was in the best interest of the insurance company, which represented both drivers, to minimize its payout, and it certainly was and expert in the issue. I needed a lawyer just to make sure my interests didn't get rolled over, and the cost -- a one-third contingency fee only if I got any money -- was certainly affordable. I didn't get rich, but I got the money I had asked for and been denied in the first place, which was enough to replace my car and take care of the medical bills.
That's how much I got after the lawyer took his cut -- funny how that worked out, huh? It occurred to me that the insurance companies and the lawyers have a carefully worked-out system. One side knows exactly how much to ask for based precisely on the type of accident, and the other knows just how much it will offer in compromise. Then a settlement is reached just before the statute of limitations runs out, and everybody is happy. But to cover all these polite games, our insurance rates keep going up. I wonder how much a factor that is in comparison to the multimillion frivolous lawsuits?
