as much as I like disney this could be a good thing. I'm tired of all the new rides being thrill rides. They make the rides way to powerfull and are surprised when someone comes off the ride sick. I'm also tired of roller coasters, not everyone can ride a roller coaster. Maybe this will make them tame down some of there rides so more people can go on them. I long for the more interactive and dark rides over the thrill rides. Thats why I liked disney the best. Don't get me wrong roller coasters and thrill rides have there place but it shouldn't be the end all and be all of rides. Maybe now they will learn.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Judges say Disney can be sued over ride safety
- Thread starter DisneyHoneymoon
- Start date
KevinPage said:Spoken like a true Plaintiff attorney. :lol:
Obviously most cases settle prior to ever going to suit, but generally speaking, defense verdicts occur over 50% across the board.
Business will only be "hurting" when people get some morals & ethics (ie - not anytime soon).
Nah, my business will be hurting when insurance companies acutally treat people fair (i.e.- not anytime soon) hehe.
chancellor
Member
KevinFSU said:
On behalf of my clients, who are mostly insurance companies, I object for the record. They always treat people fairly. :lookaroun I will place the blame on the plaintiff's bar and their TV ads. (Of course, if you guys don't keep suing, I will be out of a job :animwink: )
Also for the record, I think KevinPage is right - although 80-90% of cases settle, of the few that go to trial, the majority are defense verdicts. Which goes to show how the public perception of the litigation process is backwards (thanks to the media not reporting on those cases). I had an article with some stats from a Florida Bar News but it got thrown out when I moved my office a few weeks ago.
KevinFSU said:
You know that generalized statements like that are not admissable in court. You should be ashamed.
The plaintiff's bar has put the screws to people more than any insurance company could.
testtracker
New Member
hakunamatata said:
That is not true at all KevinFSU is right, there are so many insurance frauds, and people being cheated. And im sure the companys you represent, chancellor are not doing anything wrong, but i doubt you would represent those people who are because you wouldn't get anything out of it.
testtracker said:
Oh, yeah, you are right....thats why all the people in class actions that actually are the victems get coupons and vouchers for credit while the plaintiff attorneys get all the cash.....sounds fair to me....
Epcot82Guy
Well-Known Member
Perhaps this all suggests we should get insurance to go to WDW...:lookaroun Now I know how I'm payin' for law school!
On a serious note back to topic, I think the issue is that 80%-90% settle is causing the problem. Disney settles. period. The amount lost in negative publicity would easily dwarf any settlement amount. Therefore, all of the "get money by suing" ads create a culture. I think everyone has very valid points here, but the law is not being driven by courts now. We all have to admit that. Therefore, this ruling and every ad or action by an insurance agency must be looked at as more of a culture statement than a legal statement, IMHO.
On a serious note back to topic, I think the issue is that 80%-90% settle is causing the problem. Disney settles. period. The amount lost in negative publicity would easily dwarf any settlement amount. Therefore, all of the "get money by suing" ads create a culture. I think everyone has very valid points here, but the law is not being driven by courts now. We all have to admit that. Therefore, this ruling and every ad or action by an insurance agency must be looked at as more of a culture statement than a legal statement, IMHO.
hakunamatata said:
Speak to the attorneys that handled the class action cases. I don't handle class action lawsuits. I have heard OVER AND OVER again from clients that they would have never come to me if the insurance company would have just been fair with them. Now, as an adjuster, I was very fair. However, I know quite a few of my cohorts were not. Now that I'm on the other side, I see exactly how terrible a lot of the insurance companies are. With the exception of some of the "good hands people", most major insurers are pretty good and fine to deal with (at least when they are dealing with me). However, the smaller ones are usually ridiculous and clearly out to save money, regardless of the harm their insured has caused.
chancellor
Member
testtracker said:
Of course I get something out of it - do you work for free? I'm sure KevinFSU doesn't either (no slam at you, Kevin, we all deserve to get paid).
I can also assure you that on those rare occasions where the insurance company screws up, they pay through the nose for it. Perhaps those bad apple insurance adjusters wouldn't be so skeptical if they weren't forced to be on the lookout for people trying to scam them. Insurance fraud is ususally perpetrated by the claimant, not the company.
Epcot82Guy - I hear what you're saying. The practice of law is now more of a business than a profession. That's the real problem.
