What every law maker needs to know

[WouldaShoulda]

Originally Posted by jackdale

But you would trust these guys?

Of course not.

I can boycott big business but not big brother!!

[WouldaShoulda]

Originally Posted by jackdale

On a case by case basis.

That's the proper way.

Is there some kind of tort law up there preventing ambulance chasers from handling it as a class action??

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by WouldaShoulda

That's the proper way.

Is there some kind of tort law up there preventing ambulance chasers from handling it as a class action??

I misspoke.

It was a class action

As a result of Muir’s lawsuit, in 1998 the Alberta government acknowledged that victims were entitled to compensation and retracted a bill that would have limited court awarded compensation to sterilization victims. Five hundred and four victims were awarded $75,000 per claimant, with an additional $25,000 payable to those who lived outside of the province’s mental health institutions, in out-of-court settlements.

Subsequently, over 1200 victims of sterilization have filed suits against the Alberta government.

The Muir case got a lot of coverage.

[SloopJonB]

Originally Posted by WouldaShoulda

Pending that, why do you suppose Evil Capitalists were included in that list while Leftists like Margaret Sanger were left off??

Leftist conspiracy?

[killarney_sailor]

Originally Posted by WouldaShoulda

That's the proper way.

Is there some kind of tort law up there preventing ambulance chasers from handling it as a class action??

It is my understanding that lawyers in Canada cannot take a case on a contingency basis with no money up front and they keep a certain percentage. I think they get a fee win or lose based on their time and expenditures. This does not stop pro bono work if a potential client has an imporant case (like this one) and cannot afford representation.

I seem to remember on a couple of occasions in Ontario (and I think it is a provincial rather than federal matter) that the lawyers tried to get the law changed to allow contingency fees but the govt did not go for it.

[SloopJonB]

Originally Posted by killarney_sailor

It is my understanding that lawyers in Canada cannot take a case on a contingency basis with no money up front and they keep a certain percentage. I think they get a fee win or lose based on their time and expenditures. This does not stop pro bono work if a potential client has an imporant case (like this one) and cannot afford representation.

I seem to remember on a couple of occasions in Ontario (and I think it is a provincial rather than federal matter) that the lawyers tried to get the law changed to allow contingency fees but the govt did not go for it.

I'm no lawyer but I don't think that's correct. My daughter was in a bad car accident (2 dead) and her case was on a contingency basis.