[teeray]

> Small companies and individuals cannot pursue expensive lawsuits.

The fact that lawsuits are won by whoever has more money and time is so deeply problematic. I have no idea how you’d go about equalizing it. Spending limits with devastating consequences if it can be proven that you broke them?

[sfn42]

Simple, just make it public. You don't bring a lawyer, a lawyer is appointed.

This way everyone is on equal footing. Doesn't matter if you're a homeless bum or Jeff Bezos. Both just get an appointed lawyer.

If a suit is found frivolous, you are on the hook for the costs, as long as it's reasonable it's paid for by the state and if a party is found at fault they may also be required to cover the costs.

[bitmasher9]

Two more ideas

* More juries, and maybe something jury like for civil suits.

* Simplify the law and legal proceedings to the point where the extra time preparing won’t lead to better outcomes.

[toast0]

> * More juries, and maybe something jury like for civil suits.

Juries are available for civil suits, but most parties prefer not to have them because jury results have high variability. I'm following a case, currently pending appeal, where the jury found against the defendants for breach of contract, but awarded $0 in damages, so there's no actual relief regarding the breach.

[vablings]

Even simpler idea, Let the jury know the legal expenses of either party

[PaulDavisThe1st]

Loser pays legal fees would be one small step in roughly the right direction (though it has its own set of problems too).

[graemep]

We have that in the UK, but its at the discretion of judges, and the loser can ask the court to look at the other sides costs and only award a reasonable amount rather than full costs (to deter people from running up costs to intimidate the other side).

it works reasonably well.