|
… One bill that has a chance of passing -- it's backed by a coalition of some 160 groups and has a catchy acronym, LARA -- is the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act, a six-page bill that would purportedly reduce frivolous lawsuits, but which opponents say would merely increase litigation and has serious constitutional problems, as well. … LARA is designed to put more teeth into Rule 11, the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure dealing with frivolous lawsuits. And it is bitterly opposed by the federal judiciary. … The current legislation would eliminate the safe-harbor provision and for the first time make sanctions mandatory in the form of attorney fees -- if a Rule 11 violation was determined. That means deep-pocketed defendants could use the rule as a weapon to ward off suits, and plaintiffs and their lawyers could face judgments if their cases were thrown out. The bill also forces state judges to determine whether a particular case has any interstate commerce connections. If it does, the state judge must apply the federal Rule 11 standard. "There's no constitutional authority for Congress to order a state judge to hold that hearing to determine if there's a federal question in a state court case," notes Christopher Fairman, a professor at the Ohio State University Moritz College of Law.
For a copy of the complete article, contact CJRG. |