“American judges frequently let juries decide whether honest mistakes are negligent.”
Simply because someone makes an honest mistake doesn’t mean it’s not negligence. I may make an honest mistake that the light was green when it was in fact red, but my action in proceeding through the intersection and striking someone is still a negligent act. Wouldn’t you agree, DB?
“The third is the rule that makes each side bear its own costs. This induces riskier lawsuits than are undertaken in most other countries, such as Canada, England and most of Europe, where the loser pays the legal costs of the winner.”
Also, this is a broad generalization that is nowhere near a blanket rule in Europe, nor does it reflect whether those costs are ever collected. Not to mention, nearly every state in the US ALREADY has a form of loser pays. And, much of the litigation role in the US is handled in Europe by more detailed regulation and more government intervention. Pick your poison.
“American courts commonly think it proper for juries to infer medical negligence from the mere occurrence of a serious injury.”
This is simply a completely incorrect statement. A jury must find negligence, not simply a “serious injury” and infer from there.
Why the editorial would leave those facts out in making the comparison is unknown.