CRIMINAL LAW/CIVIL LAW:

React to the answer below for the following questions:

1. Now that you have explored the court process for both criminal and civil cases, Explain some of the key differences in how criminal and civil cases are handled.
2. Frivolous lawsuits are well publicized and the effects of them can be felt throughout society.Read the following stories and discuss how frivolous suits should be handled.Ex. Should they be blocked from the courts, is it the attorney's responsibility to prevent them, is ADR a reasonable solution, etc.

• Dr. Oz case
• Frivolous Suits
• ANSWER: "There are several differences between criminal and civil cases.In criminal cases, a person, or people have committed a crime against society when it comes to people crimes such as homicide, assault, sexual assault, and sexual abuse of a minor, or property crimes like burglary, robbery, theft, and fraud. The state/municipal district attorney (D.A.) and federal prosecuting attorneys file charges against the violator for the municipality, state, and/or federal government. The offender could have to pay a fine, do jail time, and/or do probation. A criminal case must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In a civil case, a disagreement is settled between a person, business, or government/organizations. Civil cases can be in the form of contracts, torts, divorce/custody, and estate and probate cases. Most cases are settled out of court between the parties for the injury that was incurred, monetary compensation, or an injunction relief. The proof is based on the preponderance of the evidence that the plaintiff must be able to prove.

Whenever I think of frivolous lawsuits, it reminds me of Alley McBeal. It all starts with the attorney that should deny taking the case in the first place. Most attorneys want to get paid, but this is not the way to do it. Attorneys should immediately turn these cases down. If the plaintiff has a history of filing frivolous cases, then they should be charged with fraud. I bet you they won't do it again...especially against Wal-Mart. A plaintiff may decide not to get an attorney and represent themselves in a civil action. To prevent this, the court should impose a higher fee for filing specific civil cases. I believe that alternative dispute resolutions as a mandatory step prior to court. Mediation and arbitration would definitely help in alleviating this problem, but only if both parties want to work this out, plus you should be able to prove fraud in these discussions."

-What do you think of this answer?

-which part would you agree or disagree?

-what are the strong and weak points in this answer?