Hacker News Reader

Comment by mnutt | Hacker News Reader

What if the person is very poor and doesn't have 50k to put up for a lawsuit? Should no plaintiff ever be able to sue someone for more than 5% of the plaintiff's total net worth?

The real issue is that since corporations don't have the same responsibilities as real people, they shouldn't have the same rights.

View on HN

Surely if they can find a lawyer who honestly thinks they have a case, they could get a loan for that amount.

Yes but that takes more time. It's an interesting system, but we can't pretend it doesn't have its own drawbacks.

I'm thinking the loan could be from the lawyer themselves and built into their standard payment contract (similar to that "pay nothing if we don't win!" deal perhaps), but yes, it isn't a perfect system.

I suppose that would depend on the lawyer's financial position and personal integrity.

True, it has drawbacks. I am sadly not too familiar with the whole system. I just know people try to leave court as last chance.

But it also means, I wont probably get sued for opening a door to a woman.

Then he can't ask for 50 mil. If you are poor(as living on the streets), chances are you are not going to court anyway.

I doubt that person can go against big corporation without money(good lawyers cost). And when one can afford good lawyer who has real chance of winning, then the person usually has also money for paying.

This is only when there is claim or civil suit. You can still go to police if there has been a crime of some sort. Also you can always file complaint to government. So no, this is not so unequal as it sounds.

In case, one is sure of its winning, he or she can always take loan from the bank. It just keeps nonsense cases away.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com