Loser should pay
To the editor:
I just want to put my two cents in about the Pizza Hut case in which a woman sued the restaurant and the man she opened the door for. The fact the matter is going to court is a travesty. It shows the rest of the world how big of fools we are.
I believe that if plaintiffs' lawyers fail to win a lawsuit, they should have to pay the people they were attacking the same cost they were attempting to acquire.
Maybe under the "loser pay" method, we wouldn't have more lawyers than people who can earnestly contribute to society. Unfortunately, lawsuits plus idiots does not equal justice.
If a person is going to sue for something as trivial as the Pizza Hut incident, the plaintiff should be required to basically put down a bet of sorts. If the plaintiff sways the judge and/or jury, the plaintiff deserves the money. But if the plaintiff fails, the plaintiff and the lawyer should have to pay the people they are suing.
It just seems to me like people have the world to gain, entire cities to hurt (in the short and long run), and inevitably a society to taint.