tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post700836058468251817..comments2024-03-28T09:54:55.115-05:00Comments on Dad29: PI Attorneys Pushing Another "Damages" Bill in WIDad29http://www.blogger.com/profile/08554276286736923821noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post-52865956601732298042009-04-07T17:54:00.000-05:002009-04-07T17:54:00.000-05:00The Theft-by-fraud statute is the civil remedy for...The Theft-by-fraud statute is the civil remedy for victims criminal fraud, but reduces the burden of proof from beyond a reasonable doubt to the civil burden of proof. But good luck trying to get a D.A. to prosecute such a case.Scot1andhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05560353521307181651noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post-44564956296384673612009-04-07T17:36:00.000-05:002009-04-07T17:36:00.000-05:00Thanks for your corrections (which will be noted i...Thanks for your corrections (which will be noted in the main entry.)<BR/><BR/>Seems to me that JAILTIME plus actual damages (plus fees, expenses, etc.) would be a fine remedy. If Realtors and Inspectors have to be exculpted from potential liability, (given the usual caveats), fine.<BR/><BR/>What's with the "damages"? <BR/><BR/>IOW, who you trying to kid, Super?Dad29https://www.blogger.com/profile/08554276286736923821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post-26540988894034113632009-04-07T17:26:00.000-05:002009-04-07T17:26:00.000-05:00Dad,Your wrong on this one. In fact, you get on th...Dad,<BR/><BR/>Your wrong on this one. In fact, you get on the wrong tack right out of the box: PI stands for personal injury, these are property damage claims, which are rarely taken on a contingency basis.<BR/><BR/>But back to the point, this is the so-called Below v. Norton bill, which is in response the the Wisconsin Supreme's Court activist decision last term in Below v. Norton. In that case, the Wisconsin Supreme Court applied the judicially created ecnomic loss doctrine to bar misrepresentation claims (Despite Wisconsin's recognition of such claims for over 100 years). In plain terms, your only cause of action if a seller intentionally lied to sell their house would be in contract or the two relevant statutory claims (false advertising and Theft-by-fraud). <BR/><BR/>However, this law doesn't drastically change the remedies. Arguably, the statutory remedies are better anyway as they permit recovery of attorney fees and triple damages) But this law would affects the statute of limitations by imposing the discovery date as the date the statute begins to run instead of the contract date. <BR/> <BR/>"That means that Realtors and Home Inspectors will have to purchase large-amount liability policies."<BR/><BR/>Actually this helps the Realtors and home inspectors. Realtors and Home inspectors provide "services" and thus, never fell within the ambit of the Economic loss doctrine. (The ELD only applies to "goods" which now includes houses thanks to the most liberal definition of goods in the entire country.)<BR/><BR/>This creates in unequitible result for the realtors because even if the home owner could not be sued because of a statute of limitation problem, the realtors could (they too have certain obligations with regard to inspections). For that reason, the Wisconsin realtors filed amicus briefs in Below in support of the plaintiffs. After all, if they were also mislead by the defendant shouldn't they be entitled to contribution? <BR/><BR/>Frankly, had the Wisconsin Supreme court not engaged in such activist interpretation of the ELD, this law would be unnessesary.Scot1andhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05560353521307181651noreply@blogger.com