Apparently it wasn't such a frivolous suit for the spilled coffee now was it since a jury found in her favor? Where is your outrage at the jury? I bet McD's checks the temp on the coffee they've serve since then. Lawsuits and class action cases help keep companies in line. Without the fear of being sued do you REALLY think they would do the right things to protect their customers? Glad you don't get to decide who can sue or be sued here in the US. Folks with your opinion are why we need such laws in the US to protect claimants. You might not know this, but for someone to have a right to sue, that means there is a law in place that allows for such lawsuits. Attorneys earn a living just like everyone else. You might not know this but many lawyers turn down cases during any given year because of the reason you cite or others. Believe it or not, many claimants can't find attorneys to handle their cases because douche bag tort reform proponents have taken away or limited many types of damages sight unseen across the boards on certain causes of action. In many of those cases an attorney can't take the case because the attorney fronts the costs for the client during the pending case (expert witnesses - which can cost six figures or more in a med mal case, depositions, travel, etc) and has to collect them at the end of the case from the client's recovery - and nowadays most plaintiff attorneys in my state put in the retainer agreements (to be competitive with other attorneys) that if they (the attorneys) don't recover for the plaintiff, the plaintiff owes the attorneys $ZERO (the attorney gets no fee and eats all the litigation costs). If the case is not financially worthwhile to the attorney the client can't sue because nobody wants the case. This happens many times a day believe me. You know who benefits? Insurance companies and negligent physicians (for med mal cases). Those two groups love caps on certain types of damages because then they are off the hook, sometimes for millions $$$, even when the physician is clearly liable. The jury/judge is the decider of fact, not the lawyer nor the general public. If a cause of action doesn't exist it is up to the judge/jury to day NO. You are picking out the exception and trying to argue it is the rule. PS I do think there should be a rule where the loser pays the winner's legal fees under certain types of claims. That would cut down on many BS cases but could cause some legitimate litigants to be afraid to pursue their claims and lose out. There really is NO PERFECT answer to all of this unfortunately.