Personal Injury Law

35W Bridge collapse demonstrates that tort immunity spawns complacency

I grew up in Minneapolis. I traveled over the I-35W Bridge hundreds of times. I drove under the bridge on a boat dozens of times. I marveled at the beauty of the bridge and the beautiful views from the bridge. I never imagined that the bridge might fail. I assumed that teams of qualified professionals made sure it would not fail.

I was horrified when I heard that those charged with the responsibility to keep the bridge safe did nothing despite knowing the bridge might fail. I am frightened that those same people will likely never be held accountable for their complacency. I fear that the only ones who will pay for this lack of responsibility are the friends and loved ones of those who died or were injured in the collapse.

Tort immunity, a concept that shields governments from liability in injury cases, may prevent those injured and the families of those killed from ever obtaining justice in this tragedy. After the recovery effort has finished, and the investigations are complete, talented lawyers will try vigorously to hold the responsible governmental and private entities accountable. Hopefully tort immunity will not block their efforts.

I am a Chicago lawyer and I fight for the rights of injured people. Efforts at protecting people and companies whose actions can kill and injure, commonly called tort reform and tort immunity, serve only to breed complacency and sanction irresponsible behavior. Tort reform and tort immunity are bad for everyone. That is why I, and the lawyers at my firm, remain committed to the fight against tort reform.

Full post as published by Chicago Injury Lawyer Blog on August 04, 2007 (boomark / email).