I hear about "class action" lawsuits all the time, but I don't really know what they are,
or if they would apply to what I want to do.
It seems they are always used when there is a group of people who want to sue one person
for the same thing.
I got one of those photo-radar speeding tickets the other day, and I'm pissed.
I want to seek out other people who have gotten these tickets,
and an attorney who would take action against the city.
Is that a "class action" lawsuit?
If not, what terminology should I be using?
A class action suit is a lawsuit brought on behalf of a large number of people instead of on behalf of an individual.
I'm not a lawyer, and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but the way I understand it...
A class action suit is a suit where the specific plantiffs are not mentioned. It is a lawyer saying this company (or law enforcement agency, or company that makes speed cameras, or whatever) did something wrong. If your side wins, the payout is divided up among those affected. I'm pretty sure everyone who has gotten a photo-ticket could get a little check out of the deal. Very little after the lawyer fees.
During a fracas years ago about the supposed failure, and subsequent class-action lawsuit involving the failure (kb) of a Remington 11-87 barell. If I remember correctly, the person who started this had re-loaded his own shells, which contributed to the kb.
After all was said and done (meaning the lawyers had taken their cut), I received a check for ~ $50 to purchase a new barell.
Lawyers love class-action suits.
Those to whom the compensation is to support are quite likely, based upon my experience, less than impressed.
Class action lawsuits are an industry, where lawyers legally extort money out of deep pockets for stuff that nobody in their right mind would give a shit about.
When a company knows that they'll be found liable and the pool of potential plaintiffs is large, they may push for class action status. Trial lawyers hate this because their case (and fees) get lumped in with all the others.
If you were first to the table and all the work you did was going to be shared with other lawyers, you'd be plenty pissed.
What they said on the class action info.
Where you speeding? If so TOUGH SHIT!
If not , youd have to prove otherwise
An attorney who does the leg work can be the lead attorney in a class action suit and get his rightfully stolen property.
FYI, this is not what that lawsuit was about.
It was alleged in the suit that Remington used a different grade of steel in its *12 gauge* shotgun barrels. It was only about 12 gauge shotguns. The steel was not as strong (allegedly) as what was used in other gauges and a guy had a barrel rupture. It did not involve reloading, at least after it was all said and done. The guys name was Garza, as I recall, and you can probably do a legal search and find the specific case.
All that being said, the money that Remington paid you (and me for that matter) was the *loss in value* of your *12 gauge* shotgun due to this type of steel being used. If you did have a rupture and you suffered injury, then that would be a seperate lawsuit.
Reader's Digest version:
(1) Law firm looks around for a business with deep pockets and
(2) figures out a law suit they think will fly,
(3) Then advertises on TV for "victims" who want some free money for which they
(4) will even supply the doctors for the victims' "free "screening".
Any product will do as long as the companies are large and the product was in widespread use... tobacco, asbestos, sand ("silicosis" suits in Mississippi), etc. Does not matter if the "victim" was ever sick, as long as "if you ever worked in any of these industries...".
Yea, because in America the Constitution says we are guilty until we prove ourselves innocent.
And that we don't get to face our accusors.
We don't get a jury trial.
And to top it off, I was only given 11 days to pay the fine, or else.
Credit card companies even give more time than that.
"tough shit", huh.
You must be a communist just like my city councel.
There is no evidence of who was driving. Was it me? Who knows?
The only evidence is a photo of my vehicle.
There is a reported speed and speed limit,
but no evidence as to any accuracy of the reported speed.
I owe the city $65 for a ticket.
I'd rather pay multiple times as much to a lawyer who could get a judge to
rule these cameras are unconstitutional, as has been done in other states.
I'd be willing to bet that everyone who has gotten a ticket so far feels the same way.