Why can't we counter sue people? Like if I'm being sued for doing what's right I want to make sure the person who is suing me if i win gets the same punishment they desired for me instead.
You sue me for money. Bitch I was right now you pay my lawyers and you give me money.
Attorney here, you can file a counter lawsuit if you believe they did something wrong. In this case she could file a counter suit for defamation of character for going around saying she murdered her father in cold blood.
Of course if the case is thrown out because the defense wins you can always ask for attorney's fees for defending the case.
The argument goes as follows: if losing a suit opened you to being countersued, that would make it even less likely for a "little guy" to go up against someone with power. (As the little guy likely has worse lawyers, and if they lose, now suddenly they open themselves to a countersuit.)
That is just a stupid argument. The lawyers shouldn't matter ! THE LAW SHOULD!
(As the little guy likely has worse lawyers, and if they lose, now suddenly they open themselves to a countersuit.)
And that is exactly how it should be. You make a claim ... THAT IS BEING JUDGED ... After the TRAIL we know it is NOT TRUE ... BECAUSE THE TRIAL HAS SETTLED IT ... SO YOU HAVE TO PAY ! Either way ... someone FUCKED UP.
Why can't we counter sue people? Like if I'm being sued for doing what's right I want to make sure the person who is suing me if i win gets the same punishment they desired for me instead.
You sue me for money. Bitch I was right now you pay my lawyers and you give me money.
Attorney here, you can file a counter lawsuit if you believe they did something wrong. In this case she could file a counter suit for defamation of character for going around saying she murdered her father in cold blood.
Of course if the case is thrown out because the defense wins you can always ask for attorney's fees for defending the case.
A somewhat serious answer:
The argument goes as follows: if losing a suit opened you to being countersued, that would make it even less likely for a "little guy" to go up against someone with power. (As the little guy likely has worse lawyers, and if they lose, now suddenly they open themselves to a countersuit.)
That is just a stupid argument. The lawyers shouldn't matter ! THE LAW SHOULD!
And that is exactly how it should be. You make a claim ... THAT IS BEING JUDGED ... After the TRAIL we know it is NOT TRUE ... BECAUSE THE TRIAL HAS SETTLED IT ... SO YOU HAVE TO PAY ! Either way ... someone FUCKED UP.
Agreed. However, "shouldn't matter" is not the same as "doesn't matter".
That just makes the original argument MORE STUPID!