|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
Tri-Comp Inc Pages:
|
 News Roundup:
Who's liable for litigation? After four months of wrangling and truly impressive parliamentary maneuvers, Congress may actually be closing in on a bill that limits businesses' vulnerability to a looming avalanche of lawsuits sparked by the year 200 problem. The sudden progress is remarkable. Whether you think limiting companies' liability for Y2K-related problems is a good idea or a mistake, anybody who's been watching the battle in Washington over the issue should be forgiven for treating it like a tennis match: back and forth and back ... Republicans claim to want to protect businesses that are already taxed by the demands and expenses of preparing their operations for Y2K-related failures from opportunistic litigants who see an extraordinary chance to roll the dice for the lawsuit jackpot. Democrats say that they're concerned that people may have no recourse if litigation limitations become law and corporate negligence leaves consumers holding the bag. In more cynical and probably more realistic terms, Republicans are just shielding their corporate patrons while Democrats are having their strings pulled by the trial lawyers' lobby. However you look at it, the two sides have clashed in Congress for four months over proposals to restrict, in one way or another, the ability to sue company's for costs incurred because of non-compliant hardware and software and other glitches caused by Y2K. Overshadowing the legislative proceedings have been White House threats to veto any bill that doesn't please the president. Now, though, despite executive disapproval, the House has approved legislation that sets a 90-day "time out" period during which lawsuits can't be filed, caps punitive damages (juries in some regions of the country have been taking it upon themselves to add seemingly random numbers of zeros onto civil awards in cases against large companies), and shields corporate executives from personal liability in Y2K cases. It also adopted a "loser pays" provision that requires the unsuccessful party in a lawsuit to reimburse the legal costs of the victor. This is a standard practice in English courtrooms, but relatively rare in the United States. Now it's the Senate's turn. The upper chamber -- either less partisan or less principled, depending on how you view such matters -- is traditionally not so adversarial as the House in its considerations, and usually unwilling to go toe-to-toe with the White House or pass groundbreaking legislation. Its own deliberations over a Y2K litigation bill stalled last week. Now, though, with a bill successfully passed by the lower chamber, the Senate has returned to the issue. Like the House proposal, The Senate's bill includes a a 90-day "time out" period, but it drops the cap on damages and the special protection for corporate officers. If it survives the senatorial gauntlet, those differences will have to be ironed out in a conference with House leaders. And then there's the White House to consider, where President Clinton has set himself against litigation limitations, but where embattled heir apparent Vice President Gore is torn between the traditional Democratic loyalty to trial lawyers and his own new-found affection for campaign donations from Silicon Valley. The Y2K bill still has quite a distance to go.
|
||||||||
