Tort Law Paper Example

Introduction

Tort reforms can be best described as proposed changes in the civil justice system of the United States and other parts of the world with the aim of reducing the ability of victims in search of legal action to do so and to minimize the damages they can receive. For instance, an alteration in tort infractions makes it possible for the reduction of the amount of money that an injured person can be compensated in the litigation cases (Galasso et al., 400). Usually, the parties that advocate for the tort reform often do so with the aim of eliminating the adverse effects that the process of taking legal action has on the economy. For example, malpractice lawsuits are usually costly and may lead to the rising of the cost of medical coverage, therefore, which has a significant impact on the state's economy (Galasso et al., 400). The primary goal of this paper is to comprehensively discuss the position picked for discussion in this essay which is the need for the tort law reform.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Minimizes on the Punitive Costs of Civil Liability

One of the primary reasons why the tort reforms in the United States are necessary is due to the need of limiting the punitive costs of civil liability (Matter et al., 370). The justice system is not designed to make people rich because of an unfortunate and unexpected circumstance; instead, it is about making people as a whole. One of the primary goals of this reform is to limit the punitive costs to be rewarded to a particular injured party so that this part of the civil justice system does not become about making profits (Zywicki 2).

Maintains the Ability to File a Lawsuit

Even though the reform makes it difficult for people to file lawsuits, affected parties are not banned from seeking justice. The tort reform requires merely the individuals to provide standing to as a means of justification for their claims. With this kind of a rule, the process can go forward in the best way possible to grant justice to those who deserve it.

The Reform Offers Alternate Methods of Dispute Resolution

With the tort reform, cheaper methods to obtain justice can be found other than filing lawsuits. These reforms encourage the disputing parties to solve their cases through the processes of arbitration or mediation which do not require as much money as filing lawsuits. With alternative methods like the ones mentioned above, funds can be made available faster to the victim, therefore, making it possible to meet their obligations or treatment sooner than waiting for years for a judgment to be made in a court of law (Matter, Ulrich & Alois Stutzer 374).

Limitation of Attorney Fees

One of the best reasons why tort reforms are crucial is their ability to limit the attorney fees to something that is reasonable. Therefore, more money is rewarded to the victim instead of funding damages awarded to a specific case. Although attorneys deserve to be paid, they should not be rewarded millions of dollars while the victims receive just a small portion of the money for their compensation. With the tort reform, there is justice in the civil judicial system (Zywicki 3).

Conclusion

The primary goals of the tort reform in the United States is to make it difficult for individuals to obtain jury trails, for people to obtain lawsuits and limits the amount of money that the victims are rewarded. With this reform, the victim is easily compensated although the amount of money to be paid is reduced. Alternative methods of solving disputes between parties make it less costly when solving problems and the victim is easily compensated instead of waiting for years for a lawsuit to be completed.

Works cited

Galasso, Alberto, and Hong Luo. "Tort reform and innovation." The Journal of Law and Economics 60.3 (2017): 385-412.

Matter, Ulrich, and Alois Stutzer. "The role of lawyer-legislators in shaping the law: evidence from voting on tort reforms." The Journal of Law and Economics 58.2 (2015): 357-384.

Zywicki, Todd. "Public choice and tort reform." (2000). 2-6