[nopinsight]

I believe the loser of a court case, especially if they are the initiator, should foot the legal bills for both sides. At least this will offer small parties who are attacked by predatory lawsuit from a large party a fighting chance (with obvious risks), especially when the case is not warranted. Why is this not implemented in US law?

[protomyth]

One reason it is not implemented is that it would stop most poor people from suing insurance companies. They have very deep pockets and the bill would be excessive, so the cost of trying to right a wrong would scare off most attorneys that would take the case. Polluters is another class of case that generally fits into this.

Tort reform is needed, but automatic loser pay works to the advantage of big companies.

[sgift]

Looser pays always sounds good in theory and is hell in practice. We have it in Germany (IANAL and there are exceptions and so on) and the result is that companies can do almost anything without getting sued. The risk of paying the whole case is too high for individuals.