The Louisiana Supreme Court’s Alarming U-turn
The Pelican State deserves a judicial system that stands firmly on principles — not one swayed by the most recent political winds.
Uber Sexual Assault Survivors for Legal Accountability and Nevada Justice Association vs. Uber Technologies, Inc.
(Nv., filed August 8, 2024): Arguing that judicial review of ballot initiative petitions is limited to the requirements of NRS 295.009 and Article 19 of the Nevada Constitution—it does not
include policy considerations. Additionally, there are strong policy reasons for a 20% cap on contingency fees including the fact that overlitigation is a drain on Nevada’s economy, excessive tort litigation threatens Nevadans’ access to competent healthcare, and certain Nevada lawyers benefit from a limitless contingency fee system to the detriment of injured parties. Lastly, Nevadans support a 20% cap on contingency fees even after hearing Appellants’ policy arguments against the initiative petition.
Latest News
View all news
Trial Lawyers’ Latest Target: Life-Sustaining Baby Formula
Judges must recognize these cases for what they are: a cynical attempt to turn the suffering of families into a litigation jackpot.
Wall Street Journal: Junk Science Sometimes Still Prevails in Court
A recent Delaware case shows that not all states follow the Supreme Court’s 1993 Daubert ruling.
ATRA Applauds Utah AG Candidate Rudy Bautista for Signing Transparency Pledge
Republican Candidate Derek Brown Urged to Sign Pledge
Baltimore’s Opioid Lawsuit Is Wrong Approach to Overdose Crisis
Maryland taxpayers should be assured that state leadership is working in their best interests and not those of entrepreneurial trial lawyers.
ATRA Sounds Alarm on Colorado’s ‘Lawsuit Inferno’ in New Report
ATRA Declares State a ‘Lawsuit Inferno’ Amid Liability Onslaught