

Earlier in March, the state’s Legislature passed House Bill
4120, which would prohibit such demands in ad damnum clauses. Exceptions are
provided by the bill for cases when a specific amount is necessary for
obtaining or preserving jurisdiction or otherwise required by an existing
statute or rule. A similar law for medical malpractice cases is already in
place.
West Virginia Governor Joe Manchin received the bill on Monday, March 17 after
it was unanimously passed by both the House and Senate.
Teresa Toriseva, president of the West Virginia Association for Justice,
mentioned two lawsuits filed in 2007 which helped trigger public perception
about “frivolous” suits, although both were outside of “the accepted practice
of responsible attorneys.”
In one case, a judge in Washington,
D.C. filed a $54 million suit
against a dry cleaner for losing a pair of pants. The other was a West Virginia suit for
$10 million filed against McDonald’s for putting cheese on a hamburger.
According to Toriseva, both received national attention but would not have
attracted any attention had the attorneys filing the cases not included large,
unjustified financial demands. She says that the legislation would help ensure
that the evidence in the case fully supports the damages being sought.
Bob Massie, a Huntington, West
Virginia attorney, says that it will help the perception of West Virginia’s judicial
system. He says that some attorneys were abusing the practice for the sake of
publicity or attention, which harmed the state through the backlash.
Post a Comment to "Should a Lawsuit Say Exactly What You Are Asking For?"
To reply to this message, enter your reply in the box labeled "Message", enter your username and password, and hit "Post Message."