Product Liability
- Share via
Regarding Robert J. Samuelson’s commentary, “Streamlining Product-Liability Suits” (June 24), I agree with many of his comments. Product liability laws compensate the victims of defective products and deter the future manufacture and sale of such products. When a company acts outrageously with a “let ‘em burn” attitude as Ford Motor Co. did in the Pinto cases, then punitive damages are also appropriate.
I part company with Samuelson, however, when he advocates the so-called “English rule” which would require the “loser” to pay the legal fees of the winning attorney or make the losing attorney personally liable if the case were taken on contingency.
Everyone knows that as a practical matter, the average person injured by a defective product has no recourse to the legal system except through an attorney who is willing to take the case on contingency.
The “English rule” would unfairly intimidate people with valid claims from taking any legal action for fear that they might lose their homes and their life’s savings. Few attorneys would be willing to take this type of risk either, and the result would be that real victims of defective products would not receive any compensation at all.
CHARLES J. MAZURSKY
President-Elect
Los Angeles Trial Lawyers Assn.
Inside the business of entertainment
The Wide Shot brings you news, analysis and insights on everything from streaming wars to production — and what it all means for the future.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
