Note that some court-ordered damages can be discharged with bankruptcy and some cannot; I don't know the full details of categorization there. But in the absence of bankruptcy, the payment has to happen at some point by some means.
The word “technicality” is also misleading: every law has some justification, and if a plaintiff finds themselves on the wrong side of that law, they legitimately lost the lawsuit and should have never brought it.
What I'm trying to ask is why is our legal structure in the U.S. setup in such a way that simply filing a suit against someone immediately puts a significant financial burden on the defendant?
Our legal system is mostly about wealth, unless it's a dispute between two people of vaguely equal wealth.
How often are people able to recuperate expenses incurred while defending against a frivolous suit? How much additional legal work is required to actually seek reparations like this? Is it judged as part of the original case, or is it a separate lawsuit?
Popehat has a good explanation: https://www.popehat.com/2012/06/07/why-yes-i-am-into-slappin...
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
