Today's argument for tort reform

Today's argument for tort reform comes from St Louis.

The mother of a boy who was shocked and fell 35 feet after climbing an Illinois electric tower on a $5 bet is suing the utility for allegedly failing to properly warn of the tower's dangers and keeping children from it.

We have a system where a group of jurors can punish a company and reward a woman for her kids stupidity and if she loses the case she loses nothing since there is no real penalty for filing frivolous lawsuits (a legal form of attempted robbery). Most of these BS lawsuits are settled out of court as companies give in to the extortion rather than risk getting a jury that decides to be nice with other people's money. I think the only way to reduce the number of these type of lawsuits is to hold the attorney liable for counter suit by the defendant.

A non-frivilous lawsuit?

I occasionally mock the actions of lawyers and others who attempt to turn personal tragedies into winning lottery tickets, but I have to make an exception for this guy.

An Air Force veteran has filed a federal claim after an operation at a Veterans Administration hospital in which a healthy testicle was removed instead of a potentially cancerous one.

I can just see the doctor in surgery talking to himself "Now, was it my left or his? Oh well, I have a 50/50 chance of being right, no sense wasting time double checking." Amazing.