Liability Crisis: Small Businesses at Risk
基于对约300名小企业主的调查，发现他们质疑责任诉讼的公正性，认为法律诉讼被过度使用，多数人认为需要法律改革，但小企业尚未形成统一应对策略。
ABSTRACT: CRISE DE RESPONSABILITE: PETITES ENTREPRISES EN PERIL Cet article, consacre A la crise de responsabilite, commente les resultats d'une enquette portant sur quelque 300 gbrants de petites entreprises. D'apres lex resultats obtenus, ces derniers remettent en question l'equite des sentences rendues en faveur des plaignants, en cas de responsabilite, et partagent l'opinion selon laquelle l'engagement de poursuites judiciaries estdevenu une option partrop privilegiee pour la resolution de problemes. La plupartdes sujets interroges pensent que des reformes legales sont necessaires. Les petites entreprises n'ont pas encore definie une strategie commune pour faire face A la crise. Cette etude les encourage a s'associer aux compagniesd' assurance pour determiner quels changements essentiels peuvent etre apportes aux lois portant sur les dommages-interets. INTRODUCTION During the past several years, there has been a widening of the meaning and application of the term liability,.sup.1 which has led to an explosion in litigation and increases in damage awards and insurance rates..sup.2 The cost of insurance has become prohibitive, increasing by as much as 1,000 percent in one year for some firms.sup.3 The problems created by these events and the associated effects on our nation's businesses and the economy have come to be known as the liability insurance For many small businesses, the crisis has meant disaster. The crisis is a frequent subject for discussion and debate. Much of the debate centers around who is responsible for the present predicament and what should or can be done to correct the problem. Even a casual examination of the situation reveals that it is a pervasive and highly complex problem. Almost every sector of the American economy is affected by it, and there appear to be no simple answers concerning its resolution. There is considerable disagreement about the causes of the problem. All of the parties involved tend to deny blame and point to someone else as the villain. A more plausible view is that all participants bear at least part of the blame for the present difficulties. To some extent, the general public's attitude that everyone is entitled to recovery of losses from any injury is at the root of the problem. Even when the injury or damage is caused by the injured party's own carelessness or stupidity, an attempt is made to shift the burden of the loss to the party with the deepest pocket. Attorneys for plaintiffs have exploited this public attitude by convincing juries and judges of the merits of novel concepts of liability. Acceptance of this change in views of fault has greatly expanded the meaning of liability, causing losses formerly accepted and borne by the injured to be shifted to someone presumably better able to bear the loss. Meanwhile, the unusually high interest rates of the 1970s prompted insurance companies to cut rates well below levels commensurate with the risk they were assuming in order to obtain premium income to invest at the high interest rates. When interest rates began to fall, the investment income was insufficient to make up the difference in the insurance rates being charged and the increased risks the insurance companies were assuming. In order to offset this sudden turn of events, insurance premiums were increased. Additionally, some business firms, in misguided efforts to cut costs, allowed unsafe products, services, and/ or work environments, which contributed to injuries. Thus, to some extent all parties bear some responsibility for the problem. As for solutions, insurance companies argue that the problem lies in the courtroom and that tort reform is a necessity; lawyers and consumer groups push for federal regulation of the insurance industry in order to eliminate rate volatility and make insurance more readily available. In the meantime, small businesses are left to bear the brunt of the crisis. …