Hello, Doug:
Right now the elites are drumming the agitprop in the Louisiana Legislature to instruct the proles that all animals are equal, except when of course a prole seeks compensation for all injuries under the conservative, Judaeo-Christian philosophy that a tortfeasor should remedy all damages, and then supposedly conservative lawmakers go corporatist/syndicalist in nature. Bad enough the state of Louisiana carved out for itself and the medical lobby a cap, or less euphemistically, a determination that the State can kill you and get on the hook for only $500,000 and without any consideration of depreciation of purchasing value. I’m aware that Texas says the State can take one’s life for even less, $100,000. But then, one remarks, such laws apply only to State sanctioned killings, even though with the encroachment of State activity in our daily life, there’s the non-too-distant likelihood that all torts will fall under State activity.
Seems that Mississippi has gone one better and I find so remarkable our statist hypocrites in Baton Rouge have not proposed this affliction on the proles, to-wit, Mississippi’s statutory $1 million cap on noneconomic damages. The cap is set out in Mississippi Code § 11–1–60.
Seems that this obvious assault on rights never got the treatment deserved in federal court, for the cases show a remarkable lack of lawyering challenging constitutionality and failure to plead at the proper time. Still, it is amazing that after decades of assault on the proles in Louisiana that our gang of thieves haven’t visited the Mississippi affliction on Louisiana.
Although tempting to engage in the dry reading of caps on behalf of the State and private actors in the law in Mississippi, just musing out loud if any of your readers got a dose of Animal Farm treatment in litigation, i.e. all tortfeasors are responsible, but some more than others?
Hi Al, sorry for schlepping in the replies, it is still busy season for me and that is not a bad thing considering the alternatives. If memory serves the liability cap was challenged at MSSC and upheld.
Since Phillip shut down at MS Litigation Review there is a real need for regular legal analysis, especially with Facebook legal experts recommending 42 USC 1983 lawsuits against the shutdown orders. I can almost picture the facepalms at the courthouse should an idiot actually get the idea such is a good idea here in the 5th Circuit in the MSSD.
Hello, Doug:
Right now the elites are drumming the agitprop in the Louisiana Legislature to instruct the proles that all animals are equal, except when of course a prole seeks compensation for all injuries under the conservative, Judaeo-Christian philosophy that a tortfeasor should remedy all damages, and then supposedly conservative lawmakers go corporatist/syndicalist in nature. Bad enough the state of Louisiana carved out for itself and the medical lobby a cap, or less euphemistically, a determination that the State can kill you and get on the hook for only $500,000 and without any consideration of depreciation of purchasing value. I’m aware that Texas says the State can take one’s life for even less, $100,000. But then, one remarks, such laws apply only to State sanctioned killings, even though with the encroachment of State activity in our daily life, there’s the non-too-distant likelihood that all torts will fall under State activity.
Seems that Mississippi has gone one better and I find so remarkable our statist hypocrites in Baton Rouge have not proposed this affliction on the proles, to-wit, Mississippi’s statutory $1 million cap on noneconomic damages. The cap is set out in Mississippi Code § 11–1–60.
Seems that this obvious assault on rights never got the treatment deserved in federal court, for the cases show a remarkable lack of lawyering challenging constitutionality and failure to plead at the proper time. Still, it is amazing that after decades of assault on the proles in Louisiana that our gang of thieves haven’t visited the Mississippi affliction on Louisiana.
Although tempting to engage in the dry reading of caps on behalf of the State and private actors in the law in Mississippi, just musing out loud if any of your readers got a dose of Animal Farm treatment in litigation, i.e. all tortfeasors are responsible, but some more than others?
Hi Al, sorry for schlepping in the replies, it is still busy season for me and that is not a bad thing considering the alternatives. If memory serves the liability cap was challenged at MSSC and upheld.
Since Phillip shut down at MS Litigation Review there is a real need for regular legal analysis, especially with Facebook legal experts recommending 42 USC 1983 lawsuits against the shutdown orders. I can almost picture the facepalms at the courthouse should an idiot actually get the idea such is a good idea here in the 5th Circuit in the MSSD.