Forum Moderators: LifeinAsia
My question is, how much do plaintiffs(is that the accuser?) have to spend in trying to pursue legal action against me, if they were indeed to go forward with such an action? Are they spending similar amounts I'd have to go through to defend myself? if that's the case, it seems like anyone calling 'suit' would likely be bluffing, and me knowing that i can bluff right back - 'hey I'll see ya in court, or...we can try and solve this amicably'.
Just curious what goes on.
My question is, how much do plaintiffs(is that the accuser?) have to spend in trying to pursue legal action against meThe filing fee itself will depend on the jurisdiction, ranging from a few dollars to a few hundred dollars. That's excluding lawyer fees, however, and a drop in the bucket compared to the latter-- the cost to bring a suit will not differ significantly from the cost to defend against one, and the costs add up quickly (often hundreds of dollars per hour at the baseline).
if that's the case, it seems like anyone calling 'suit' would likely be bluffing, and me knowing that i can bluff right backMaybe. But you still need to pay hundreds or thousands of dollars to defend against the nuisance suit. One side or the other doesn't need to win the legal argument outright to come out on top, they just need to make continuing the case unpalatable to the other party in terms of time or money or fear. Since some plaintiff's attorneys work on contingency (i.e. they take a percentage of the settlement or award instead of charging fees directly), the marginal cost to the plaintiff may actually be relatively low.
That's why, right here on WebmasterWorld, you'll see people advising others to have their lawyers draft a simply cease and desist order-- the simple threat of the cost and inconvenience of defending against legal action, practically regardless of the merits, is often sufficient to make the other side back down.
Of course it can works both ways. After the federal government, the most-sued entity in the U.S. is Wal-Mart. They can't afford to go to trial every time someone slips on a grape and decides to sue, and end up settling many cases out of court. But in more serious cases where the other side is not willing to settle, they can bring their superior resources (human and financial) to swamp their opponents with paperwork and motions that will make it extremely costly and unpleasant for the other side to continue. I do not envy anyone in the gunsights of Wal-Mart's lawyers :).
>It's not unlike Ebay feedback system or Amazon reviews.
These folks have large firms of Attorney's on retainer and considerable in-house council. They worry less because their sharks have sharp teeth and are a cost regardless.
My advice is that if you are going to get into anything which may attract legal flack then you better be prepared to fight fire with fire. That means a large legal bankroll available and a top firm on retainer when they are needed.
Intimidation is a big part of the US legal system. Have a 7 digit legal fund at your disposal and most will not want to mess with you......they will look for the amicable settlement instead.
