Big corporation lawsuits/why is it?

[jefnvk]

http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/19/news/fortune500/vioxx/index.htm?cnn=yes

Reading this, I wonder.  Lately, there has been a number of lawsuits agains pharmaceutical companies doue to what they say are marketing unsafe products.

Couple that with gun manufacturers getting sued over misued guns.  The case I especially look at is Bushmaster getting sued because they should have known that the store was losing guns, and should have refused to sell to them.

Why is the government never sued?  Why didn't this lady go against the FDA for approving the drug?  They are teh ones that approved it for sale, which should mean it is safe.  Why wasn't the ATF sued?  They knew the problems with that store, but didn't pull their FFL.

I'm just curious.

[USP45usp]

The only way that the government can be sued is if a federal court allows the suit.

See the conflict of interest?

Wayne

[The Rabbi]

But in fact the gov't is very lenient in allowing lawsuits against itself.  They get sued plenty.
But the gov't has virtually unlimited resources and time to devote to defending themselves.  They dont care if it takes 20 years or more.
Corporations have lots of resources but they generally want this kind of thing behind them as soon as possible.  It is bad for their stock price and bad for the company and its other stakeholders.
So corps are more likely to settle than the gov't is.

[Standing Wolf]

Corporations have deeper pockets than government.

[Telperion]

I think the government has much deeper pockets than any corporation.  Rabbi's right with legal resources and willingness to settle.

[jefnvk]

Ah, so the suits are designed in hope that they just settle.  The gov't wouldn't, so ther is no point in trying.

Gotcha.

And I would think the gov't has much deeper pockets than corporations.

[Sylvilagus Aquaticus]

It all depends on who has the deepest pockets.  Mpm and Pop shopkeepers have limited pockets- insurance coverage, etc. Major multinational corporations have more business liability coverage, not to mention cash reserves.

To wit: Ford Motor Company and the Pinto.

It would have cost Ford a minimal amount to recall and retrofit the Pinto with a protected bolt, a plate to protect the gas tank behind the bumper, and re-route the tail light wiring. Their accoutants decided that it would cost more for the recall than any possible legal settlements incurred in accidental fires resulting from read-end collisions.

Hence, we have the famous Exploding Pinto.


It's all about the Benjamins.


Regards,
Rabbit.