Pros And Cons Of Tort Reform

Tort Reform Legislation The Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution provides for the right to a jury trial in certain civil lawsuits. The proponents of tort reform legislation believe that in recent past there have been abuses in the civil justice system that need to be limited. In contrast, the opponents of the legislation believe that access to courts in order to seek remedy when deliberately or negligently harmed is vital for safeguarding individual rights. Opponents also believe that these rights have been under attack by interests of bug businesses over the past few decades. As evident in this seeming controversy, tort reform is associated with various advantages and disadvantages that contribute to differences in opinion. Moreover, there are concerns on whether federal tort reform legislation has gone too far or has been necessary in restraining frivolous and costly lawsuits.
Nonetheless, critics have constantly argued that some aspects of contemporary tort law encourage various trivial and unfounded lawsuits. The differences in opinion about tort reform are attributed to its advantages and disadvantages and impact. One of the advantages is that it carries out an important function by making it possible for injured parties to receive compensation (Miller, 2010, p.72). Secondly, tort reform lessens the number of lawsuits by helping to ensure that companies and organizations involved in the case are not subjected to additional punitive damages. Third, as a result of the decrease in the number of lawsuits, judges have more time to focus on other cases. The fourth advantage is that tort reform helps in lessening courts’ expenditures because of the decline in the number of personal injury lawsuits or