A 6 page paper. One writer says that America's courts have succumbed to what can only be explained as a fit of madness in terms of tort cases and damages awarded. This has led to a movement for tort reform. The writer discusses issues related to torts and tort reform and then cites Biblical principles that might be considered in these proposals. As another writer put it: God holds us accountable for our actions and our negligence. Unfortunately, our society is breeding people who believe they can do anything they want with impunity. Bibliography lists 5 sources.
didnt even notice the mistake until a friend made fun of him several years later (Pare, 1999, p. 20). * A dozen students who took a at the Houston
branch of Southern Methodist University are suing the school, contending they were misled the course would be easy. All 12 failed. Their lawyer said that they were told all they
had to know how to do was point a mouse and click (Pare, 1999, p. 20). * A man trespasses on his neighbors property and dives into the pool
-- at the shallow end -- despite a clearly posted sign warning "Do Not Dive." He suffers serious injuries. A lawsuit ensues. By the property owner against the trespasser? No,
by the trespasser against the pools maker. And the New Jersey Supreme Court rules that the trespasser can prevail if he can convince a jury that the "risk posed by
the pool outweighed its utility" -- even though his attorneys admitted that he could not show that the pool could have been designed more safely (Beisner, 2001). *
Another man stands in a phone booth, fifteen feet from a street. A drunk drivers car veers off the road, careens over the curb, jumps the sidewalk, crosses a parking
lot, and slams into the booth, injuring the man inside. The injured man sues -- not the drunken driver, but the companies that designed, installed, and maintained the phone booth!
His attorney argues that they should have foreseen the possibility that an out-of-control car would hit the booth and so should have designed, placed, and protected it better. Former California
Chief Justice Rose Bird, writing for the majority, agrees, saying, "there are no policy considerations which weigh against imposition of liability...even though the defendants conduct may have been without moral