Trent Lott on Frivolous Lawsuits

Mississippi Senator Trent Lott has said over and over that frivolous lawsuits are destroying American business, and that most lawsuits against insurance companies should be limited, if not banned completely.

Some of his prior quotes on the issue of tort reform include these gems:

"The Democrats seem to think that the answer is a lawsuit. Sue everybody." July 20, 2001

"I'm among many Mississippi citizens who believe tort reform is needed." May 8, 2002

"If their answer to everything is more lawsuits, then yes, that's a problem, because I certainly don't support that." August 2, 2002

"It's sue, sue, sue... That's not the answer." August 4, 2001

So what would you expect him to do if his Katrina-damaged house wasn't fixed when and how he demands? I would expect him to set an example. Avoid litigation. Take what the insurance company gives him.

I would be wrong.

Last week, Senator Lott filed suit, hiring a [gasp] trial attorney to represent him. What does he have to say about lawsuits now?

"I'm interested in getting results that will help a lot of people, and I'm one of them. ... This was an important part of my life savings, and I just don't think that the response was one that I could accept."

The issue is whether a wind-driven storm surge is "flooding." Most English-speaking folks would say that "flooding" is a condition that occurs when your place fills up with water. The insurance companies contend they don't have to pay for water damage at homes of their policyholders who didn't shell out the extra bucks for flood insurance. The homeowners say that the fact that water is up to the roof doesn't necessarily make it a flood. Oh, it's something like a flood, but not actually a flood, per se.

Lott would certainly call that claim frivolous if he didn't need to win such an argument in order to get someone else to pay the cost of rebuilding his flattened beachfront house. I suspect that if Lott's house was on the Texas gulf coast, still standing, and insurance companies were complaining about these lawsuits, and how they were going to go so broke that they would barely have money left over to donate to Republican candidates for Senate, Lott would probably be leading the charge to pass new legislation against such wacky lawsuits.

I guess that goes to show you that the only consistent definition of what constitutes a frivolous lawsuit is "a lawsuit that some other guy filed."

You can read the complaint for yourself here: Lott et al v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Company et al, 1:05-cv-00671-LG-RHW, 12/15/2005.

Comments

touche!!

[Cranky Greg]

Trent Lott is just another stupid politician. Another Repub hypocrite who says one thing and does another.

[exposer of the truth]

Lott supports tort reform. As you may (or may not) have learned in law school, torts and contracts are not the same thing. Lott has sued on his insurance policy, which is a contract. Tort reform would have nothing to do with this. Get your facts straight next time.

[lex icon]

The facts are straight, you anonymous and ignorant coward. Read the complaint for yourself. The last cause of action is one for fraud. Fraud is a tort.

In fact, this complaint is a poster child for bogus tort reform. You take an apparently absurd concept, such as "high water isn't a flood if it came from the sea," and add tort claims like fraud to a so-called simple contractual dispute and **boom** you've got yourself a frivolous lawsuit to mock.

Disregard, of course, the possibility that the lawsuit has merit, since Lott gives little credit to such lawsuits when he speaks on Capitol Hill. If the sound bite sounds frivolous, overreaching or harmful to business, Trent Lott will rage against it. Unless it's his fortune that was ruined by the wrongdoing of another....

To sum up:

1. Fraud is a tort. Tort reform targets lawsuits like Trent Lott's. Hence,

2. Lott is a hypocrite, and

3. Lex knows his shit, while the anonymous poster does not.

Any further questions?

[Cranky Greg]

Exposer of the Truth is an Exposed Dumb Ass. He was probably one of the know-it-alls in law school that would never stop talking.

In grade school, kids probably lined up to kick his ass.

Now, in the courtroom, lawyers are probably lining up and kicking his ass.

If he ever goes near a courtroom.

[Robert]

You know what else, this is just like the contract rights that Trent Lott opposes giving people to let them sue their HMOs for refusing to cover medical treatments. That's not a tort either, but it is part of Lott's tort reform crusade against individuals who want the courts to protect them against big companies.

Perhaps the person who wrote this unthinking op-ed should go back to school and get some "edumacation".

tort ( P ) Pronunciation Key (tôrt)
n. Law
Damage, injury, or a wrongful act done willfully, negligently, or in circumstances involving strict liability, but not involving breach of contract, for which a civil suit can be brought.

[lex icon]

Unthinking? Simply because you have a simplistic definition to recite that you don't actually understand?

Fraud is a tort. Whether there is a contract claim pled with it or not, fraud is a tort. No matter what you read in any publication, whether you understand it or not, a person who pleads fraud has alleged a tort.

Lott alleged a tort based upon a simple contractual dispute. It's precisely the sort of bullshit tort that Lott would try to shut down if it was any other citizen pursuing.

Your retort is in error. Next time, why don't you identify yourself so we can all make fun of you as you talk about things you do not understand?