More Trial Lawyer Politics in Mississippi

                The Mississippi Association for Justice, formerly the Mississippi Trial Lawyers Association, has as its motto on its website (www.msaj.org) "Lawyers Representing People Not Corporations."  In theory, such a phrase would seem appropriate and be well received by most.  It suggests that there are trial lawyers who seek to rush to the rescue of the people of Mississippi as they fight for legal justice when facing the well-funded corporate giants who are ever prepared to defend their interests perhaps to the detriment of those citizens who can't.  Sounds plausible enough, even chivalrous.  But the truth is that many trial lawyers, seemingly more often than not, pursue frivolous lawsuits that drive up costs that ultimately are passed on to the average consumer.  They lurk and prey, waiting for just the right moment to strike.  When they pounce, they seek often exorbitant monetary damages where they feel they have the best chance to win and pad their own pocketbooks.  It's not really about the individual client or the cause; it's about their careers.  The same can be said of trial lawyers who get elected to public office.

                Trial lawyers who become elected public officials have a tendency to bring their "Lawyers Representing People Not Corporations" philosophy into the public policy arena.  Just as the story of Robin Hood is a good children's story but makes terrible economic and public policy, so too does this trial lawyer motto.  Here's an example.

                A bill has been filed in the Mississippi House of Representatives (HB 1007) that creates the duty for persons operating trains to keep a lookout for persons and property on railroad tracks.  Sounds innocent enough, right?  Keep reading for an excerpt from the bill below:

(1) (a) It shall be the duty of all persons running trains in this state upon any railroad to keep a constant lookout for all persons, including licensees and trespassers, and property upon the track of any and all railroads.

(b) If any person or property is killed or injured by the neglect of any employee of any railroad to keep a lookout, the company owning or operating any railroad or its agents, servants and employees shall be liable and responsible to the person injured for all damages resulting from neglect to keep a lookout.

(2) (a) In any action brought for failure to keep a lookout, contributory negligence shall not bar recovery of damages for any injury, property damage, or death where the negligence of the person injured or killed is of a lesser degree than the negligence of the employee or employees in charge of the train of the company.

(b) In all such actions accruing for negligence resulting in personal injuries or wrongful death or injury to property, the contributory negligence shall not prevent a recovery where any negligence of the person so injured, damaged or killed is of a lesser degree than any negligence of the person, firm or corporation causing the damage.  However, where contributory negligence is shown on the part of the person injured, damaged or killed, the amount of the recovery shall be diminished in proportion to such contributory negligence.

Did you catch what was written there?  Railroad companies, train operators, and their employees could be held liable if any person is injured or killed or if any property is harmed while on a track under the guise of the railroad employees' not "keeping a lookout."  Does the bill's author not believe that railroad employees who are traveling at such high rates of speed are not "keeping a lookout?"  How would such action even be proven?  Moreover, how realistic is it to believe that a train traveling at such speeds could essentially stop on a dime even if the operator saw a person or an object especially given the many twists and turns in Mississippi's tracks? 

The bill goes on to say that even if the person that is harmed is found to be at fault through "contributory negligence," the rail company could still be held liable.  The bill's author tries to sugarcoat this last part by adding that "the amount of the recovery shall be diminished in proportion to such contributory negligence."  "Diminished?"  Really?  The vagueness of the implication allows trial lawyers the opportunity to at least go after something under the banner of "representing people not corporations."

It shouldn't surprise you that the author of this bill is a trial lawyer himself - Rep. Brandon Jones (D-Pascagoula). 

It is bills and subsequent laws such as these that harm our economy, put companies out of business, cause job loss, increase costs to citizens, and ultimately create an environment that is detrimental to growth and prosperity for local communities.  The frivolous lawsuits that will come as a result of this bill if it passes will only serve to pad the pockets of trial lawyers around the state, giving them yet another avenue to continue the trend of attempting to play Robin Hood.

I wonder: Could this be a precursor to things to come?  Will we see more such attempts to encourage irresponsible litigation?  Could the tort reform progress we have seen in Mississippi be eroded by similar efforts?  Let's all hope for the sake of our state and our collective futures that this bill and others like it meet a quick, fiery death.

Frank Corder,

Pascagoula City Councilman