Ambulance Chasers Probably Won’t Be Able to Defeat SB 117
COLUMBUS - A shortened clock set by the court has worked against an attempt to repeal a new state law limiting damages in consumer lawsuits and prohibiting public nuisance lawsuits broadly targeting an entire industry.
A coalition of trial attorneys and consumer advocates yesterday scrambled to gather enough signatures of registered voters by today’s deadline.
“I’ve got petitions coming in from all over the state and runners picking up petitions from people still out working to get us over the top,” said Akron attorney Laura McDowall. Gov. Ted Strickland’s attempt to veto the bill on his first day in office was thwarted by the Republican-controlled General Assembly and Ohio Supreme Court.
By the time the dust settled, opponents of the law had just 60 of the usual 90 days left to complete a petition effort to place the law on hold until voters could weigh in on the issue in the November, 2008, election.
On his first day in office, Mr. Strickland recovered from the secretary of state’s office and vetoed a bill his predecessor, Gov. Bob Taft, had intended to become law without his signature. The state’s high court, however, overturned that veto.
It appears doubtful the repeal effort will be able to file sufficient signatures by today to place the bill on hold. There has been rumbling among the ranks about going to court to challenge the shortened clock.
Hurry up guys! If you want to line your pockets by working with cities to file frivolous, junk lawsuits against paint manufacturers and with excessive non-economic damages from lawsuits, you need to do better than this.
marc said,
Wrote on October 30, 2007 @ 5:50 pm
Keep bashing the trial lawyers Matt.
God for bid one of your family members or close friends is injured in an accident or killed by a nursing home or harmed by the negligence of a doctor…..you might need an attorney one day. If your loved one was seriously injured by a drunk driver can you honestly state that you would not seek the advice of an attorney? If the insurance company representing the drunk driver failed to adequetely compensate your loved one, would you not file suit in a court of law?
Just ask Trent Lott, one of your right wing leaders, who sued the pants off of State Farm Ins. Co. for denying his claim for damages to his multimillion dollar home on the coast of Mississippi after Hurricane Katrina. Hypocrite!
Come’on Matt, can you honestly assert that $5,000 for non-economic damages (pain and suffering) is a legitimate cap on damages? Do you really believe in the jury system Matt?
Keep it up Matt, because ya never know when you might need a capable “trial lawyer”.
Matthew said,
Wrote on October 30, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
It sounds like someone should have left the court room today and collected a few thousand signatures today.
marc said,
Wrote on October 31, 2007 @ 2:45 pm
As ususal, Matt will not answer any of my legitimate questions…..have some guts Matt. Show us that you can answer tough questions. I would chew you up and spit you out on cross-examination Matt.
Matthew said,
Wrote on October 31, 2007 @ 2:56 pm
Then I hope I’d atleast give you serious indigestion and a bad case of the runs.
marc said,
Wrote on October 31, 2007 @ 3:28 pm
Judgement for plaintiff and against Matt, including attorneys’ fees. Can’t cap those Matt….