Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Clodfobble
That's the way you think it should be. But the reality is it just takes one judge or juror who views it as glatt does
|
Just because a judge or juror violates their oath and ignores evidence because a big faceless company will cough up the money doesn't mean the evidence isn't there, it just means the process has been corrupted when we arrive at the point where the "reasonable man" standard doesn't include reading prominent warnings directing you to the instructions.
We do still have a long way to go on tort reform--until there's some serious *cost* to spin the judge/juror wheel-of-fortune. By the way it may only take one boneheaded judge, but it takes more than one juror in a civil action.
__________________
"Neither can his Mind be thought to be in Tune,whose words do jarre; nor his reason In frame, whose sentence is preposterous..."
Last edited by MaggieL; 07-10-2006 at 05:31 PM.
|