But that did not stop Monroe Rubber and Gasket from being sued. “I didn’t quite understand why we were receiving these [lawsuits] based on what we do here,” said owner Mike Carter.

Over the past five years, asbestos class action and mass action lawsuits have become notorious for fraud and abuse. Judges and others have exposed scams by which plaintiffs’ lawyers conduct assembly line mass medical screenings, lump hundreds of healthy people into a class with only a few sick plaintiffs, and sometimes falsify medical diagnoses. A number of fraudulent medical screeners have even been banned from work on these cases.

Now that many companies responsible for asbestos are bankrupt, plaintiffs’ lawyers are filing lawsuits against businesses like Monroe Rubber and Gasket that neither produced nor were end-users of asbestos products.

Like in many asbestos suits, nearly all of the people claiming that they were injured by Monroe Rubber and Gasket are healthy. Plaintiffs’ lawyers often bundle claims from a few asbestosis/mesothelioma patients with many other healthy plaintiffs in order to leverage greater settlements.

Mike Kosik, the manager of Monroe Rubber and Gasket, said, “We’re all sympathetic to the people who actually have the disease. The ones that we don’t like are the ones that, ‘OK, I was around it. Put my name on the list. Get me whatever you can.’”

Carter’s business employs dozens of people, including several of his family members and close friends. If Monroe Rubber and Gasket continues to accrue legal costs, all of them will lose their jobs. “This could take us out of business,” said Carter. “It’s just kind of sad because I’ve got a group of people here that work with me. And it’s their livelihoods on the line.”

“If just one of these lawsuits do get through, we’ll all be without a job.”

Months later, the local sheriff came to the Swimms’ house to personally serve Scott with papers. “Scott thought he was going to go to jail. He did not understand what was happening,” said Scott’s mother, Susan. Scott was later deposed by three plaintiffs’ lawyers. The night before, he cried himself to sleep. “Scott was intimidated by that,” his mother said. “That was a scary, scary thing.”

The Swimms’ legal ordeal lasted almost a year. Scott’s grades suffered, and his teachers called Susan to let her know how differently Scott was behaving at school. Seeing how dramatically the suit was affecting their son, the Swimms “wanted the whole thing to stop… and I wanted Scott to be able to get his little smile back,” Susan said.

Since the cost of fighting a lawsuit, no matter its merits, is often more than a settlement, the Swimms’ insurance company decided to settle the suit.

Not only did the lawsuit take an emotional toll, it put a dent in the Swimms’ income as well. The many hours Robb spent handling the lawsuit took him away from his jobs, which both paid by the hour. At the time, Robb was working as a hotel concierge and scanning tickets on the ski mountain. Susan was attempting to start her own small business.

“My son’s age was no concern,” Robb said of the lawsuit. “My family’s situation was no concern. And I do believe the lawyers used Scott and his age as a pawn to get across a certain fear that ‘we’re going to hurt your child more if you don’t pay us.’”

“What we learned is that it wasn’t about justice. And it wasn’t about what really happened in the accident… it was all about money.”

“It would have been very easy for them to let us know that the mirror was a couple of inches too high, and we could have taken care of that right away,” Piazza explained.

The plaintiffs are alleging that the height of Piazza’s mirror inflicted damages each time they visited – for a total of 27 incidents in a three month period. “The multiple visits allow the plaintiffs and their lawyer to sue for damages per visit… Had I not lowered the mirror, they probably would have continued to come and log more visits,” Piazza said. “It’s very clear to me that they were instructed by someone who really knew the law on how many times to visit, [and] what to look for.”

The same plaintiffs and plaintiffs’ lawyers who are suing Piazza have also filed against at least two neighboring restaurants for similar claims. But these few plaintiffs are only examples of a much larger problem.

California is earning a reputation for serial plaintiffs who actively seek out opportunities to file disabilities lawsuits. More Americans with Disabilities Act suits have been filed in California than in any other state, according to an article about a particular “frequent filer” in the San Francisco Weekly. Some of these plaintiffs have filed hundreds or even thousands of disabilities-related claims, often averaging several thousand dollars in profits for each one. (For example stories, see the Orange County Register and the San Diego Union-Tribune.)

Many of these suits have shuttered family-owned restaurants and small businesses. Fortunately, Piazza will keep his doors open, despite the fact that the lawsuit is costing more than the restaurant in question made last year. Given the potential impact of a lawsuit alleging such a minor violation, Piazza worries not only for his restaurant but for “every other business in California that’s having to sustain itself against these lawsuits.”

“Now I’m in the middle of a lawsuit, a very costly lawsuit… [because] I had a mirror in my men’s restroom that was a couple of inches too high.”

Last year, Charles was working in a customer’s attic when he received a call from his service crew. He learned that a man crossed a yellow line and veered into oncoming traffic, hitting one of Chase Air’s two vans head on. The police determined that the accident was the other driver’s fault. But that didn’t stop the ticketed driver from hiring a lawyer to file a claim with Charles’ insurance, threatening to sue if they did not pay for the damages that, according to the police report, he himself caused.

Like they do with many other claims, the insurance company decided that, not withstanding the facts of the accident, it would be more costly to fight and win in court than simply to pay a settlement, so they gave the driver $10,000. Charles said, “The sad truth is that it’s cheaper for [the insurer] to settle as if they did something wrong when they didn’t do something wrong… Thus it’s perpetuated that opportunistic lawyers can continue to do these things. They’re made stronger when who’s made weaker? The American people – the hardworking people.”

In this case, Charles was right. After receiving the money from Charles’ insurance company, the driver and his lawyers next sued the young man who was driving the Chase Air truck. That case is still ongoing.

Speaking about the cost of lawsuits to American businesses, whether in the form of higher insurance costs, out of court settlements, or expensive legal fees, Charles said, “All these things factor into our ultimate price to our consumers, and everybody has to pay for it.”

According to Charles, not only do the costs of liability insurance and other legal fees drive up prices, but one lawsuit could easily put his small start-up company out of business. “Justice needs to be served, but not at the expense of innocent people – that wouldn’t be justice, would it?”

One Saturday during a pop fly drill, a player dove for a ball. The sun got in his eyes, the boy said, and, instead of landing in his glove, the ball hit him in the mouth. The players’ family sued Mike and the league.

“When I first heard about it,” says Marion Mayes, director of a nearby youth league in North Carolina, “I was kind of shocked because of the fact that that’s just normal play.”

The plaintiffs alleged that Mike had been negligent in conducting his drill. The lawsuit dragged on for years before going to trial. “It was very, very stressful,” Mike said.

At first, the plaintiffs named Mike as a defendant personally. After about a year, he was dropped from the case, but he was still subject to extensive depositions and trial preparations as the lawyers prepared to argue the plaintiffs’ claim that the league was responsible for Mike’s alleged negligence.

Finally, a jury decided that Mike was not negligent in conducting his pop fly drill that day.

Though he was eventually vindicated, the lawsuit still taints Mike’s memories of the many years he spent as a volunteer coach.

“What you don’t need is something like this discouraging people from the thought of going out and helping other children,” he says.

“When I went out there and I saw that this man had run over my daughter, I was angry,” said Lauren’s mother, Janet. “Immediately, it went into my head, it was an accident.”

Unfortunately, the cyclist, an adult neighbor, did not think so. He sued 11-year-old Lauren and, later, her family. “We were flabbergasted,” said Jon Ellis, Lauren’s father.

“In many instances, the name of the game from the plaintiff’s perspective is to settle,” Jon said of the tendency for individuals and small businesses to accept settlement offers — even when they have done nothing wrong — in order to avoid expensive legal fees and years of acrimonious litigation. “But we were adamant that we didn’t want that to happen.”

The Ellis’ case dragged on for four years filled with deliberations, trial preparations, media scrutiny, and legal fees. Finally, after three days of trial and two and a half hours of jury instructions, the jury only had to deliberate for fifteen minutes before deciding that Lauren had not been negligent in any way.

Though they won the case, years of fighting the suit certainly took its toll on the Ellis family, especially on Lauren. “I think it’s ridiculous that something like this could get all the way to court,” she said.

Of lawsuit abuse in America, Janet said, “There are many gaps that will allow these suits to proceed and can be very, very damaging.”

Because the geese were protected under the Migratory Species Act, Howard and Kelly were informed that it would have been illegal to disturb the geese. So they put up tape around the planter, posted signs, and waited for the geese to hatch their goslings and move on.

Unbeknownst to Howard and Kelly, the male goose had flapped his wings, honked, and snapped at a woman walking to the fabric store next door to Watercrafters. Startled, she fell on the sidewalk.

Two years later, Howard and Kelly were served with papers announcing that the woman was suing Watercrafters for $750,000, alleging that the goose was Watercrafters’ responsibility.

“We really didn’t have anything to do with the goose other than it was in front of our store,” said Howard.

After extensive preparations, Watercrafters was forced to go to trial. Fortunately, the jury determined that Watercrafters had not been negligent. “It’s possible that, if this lawsuit had come away with a large verdict, it could have caused us to close our doors.”

Howard says that the costs of lawsuit abuse to small businesses are not just financial. They include “the time taken away from your business — the way you run your business. You start to second guess how you do business because you’re worried about the next lawsuit, and that’s not the way to run a company.”

Danny Myers is the owner of Vintage Pools and Spas in Santa Ana, California. “I’ve been in the business for almost 30 years. We build pools, spas, anything outside – yardscape, lighting, irrigation, patio covers, fireplaces, barbeques, anything outside the house.”

Danny’s company was dealt a financial blow, however, when a customer tried to turn a depth mistake into a free pool.

“This particular contract got missed on the depth. It got dug at 5 feet instead of 6 feet. We offered to fix it, it was a mistake that could be fixed, and we corresponded back and forth with him a few times by email.”

“Then I get a letter from his attorney saying not to speak with the home owner anymore, any conversation would be through the lawyers. At that point I had to hire a lawyer and it just escalated from there.”

“He first wanted the entire price of the pool back. You know, he wanted a free pool. My lawyer said that’s not going to happen, we will fix the problem,” Danny says. Despite several months of trying to negotiate, the customer wouldn’t allow Danny to fix the pool. “He just wanted the cash.”

Danny’s lawyer finally told him that it would be cheaper to settle the case than to spend the time and money it would take to fight it in court, so he settled it for $20,000. “With a lot of my time, my wife’s time, lawyer fees, stress, it made me really angry.”

“I think that there are some lawsuits that are legitimate and should be,” says Danny. “Unfortunately, there are a lot that aren’t. It’s frustrating when people sue you for unfair things that don’t amount to much other than they just want money. It kind of puts a damper on the American Dream, thinking that everybody is honest and fair, and it doesn’t always work out that way unfortunately.”

As the president of Master Landscapes in Salinas, California, Rollie Haas spends most days working with plants and designing beautiful landscapes. Unfortunately, not every experience in running his business has been fun.

“I had a lawsuit from a former friend of mine,” Rollie says. “The guy had 20 acres and we were renting/leasing that land from him. The driveway coming into it was atrocious so we put about $15,000 worth of road work getting a driveway for our equipment to come in and out.”

“He had some of his equipment parked there and he told us on a regular basis if we ever needed to use any of his stuff, just feel free.” But it ended up that his friend’s equipment was faulty and not serviceable.

“I called him and says we tried to use this equipment but its leaking oil like crazy so I don’t think it’s safe,” he says. The conversations became more like harassment, and finally Rollie had an opportunity to move his plants to another piece of property. “A few months later we got notified about this lawsuit for having destroyed his equipment, ruined his well, and destroyed his road,” says Rollie.

“They were planning on it being, at most, a one day trial and it got stretched into three. Case ended with me being vindicated and the fellow who was suing me having to pay all my attorney fees, and all the other expenses.”

Unfortunately, however, those weren’t Rollie’s only costs.

“Some of my employees had to come into court and testify,” says Rollie. “Not only the fact that you’re paying them to come in and testify, you’re losing the production of what they would be out doing.”

“In many cases there are people who have absolutely no loss or problem with the situation but they found a point of law that they can sue on,” he says. “Then attorneys looking for money jump on it.”

When he and his business partner are the only employees.

“In a startup like ours, there’s two employees, so we do everything,” says Chris Moser, president of Network 54, an Internet service which hosts message boards, blogs, chat rooms, and other online communities.

“We do the finances, we act as the CFO, we act as marketing, we do the programming, we run the servers, we do everything that’s involved in running the business.”

Chris’ site gets about 5 million visitors a month, so there’s plenty to keep him and his partner busy – including a lawsuit.

“We had some legal papers arrive at our office that was a lawsuit for $800 million dollars,” says Chris. “It was a little bit shocking to get it.”

“We were being sued for libel and slander and defamation and conspiracy by a strawberry farmer in Florida,” he says. “He found us out by finding a message posted about him on one of our message boards. We heard nothing from him and he basically sued us right off the bat.”

It turned out that the lawsuit against Chris was related to another lawsuit the farmer had filed.

“He was involved in a lawsuit against the German National Bank trying to collect on these pre-World War II gold bonds that they had been collecting and buying off of various sources.”

“Someone else posted a message on our site that allegedly defamed him,” says Chris. “When this message was posted on our system, I don’t know if he Googled it, I don’t know how he came to find it, but somehow he found this message about himself on our Internet site – a forum that was hosted by us.”

“Allegedly we were conspiring to slander him to affect the outcome of his other suit. He thought that we were involved in a conspiracy with the German National Bank, Commerce Bank, John Hancock Insurance, and a few other entities.”

“It was unbelievable. Just the context of the case was outrageous. It was just out there. It was like a drive-by lawsuit almost.”

“We needed to get representation both in California to respond immediately and in Florida,” Chris says. “We knew that the law was on our side and that was probably the best thing going into it.”

It took about five months, but eventually the plaintiff dropped his case against Network 54.

“At the end of it all, it just was a lot of time and a lot of money spent on something that was completely unnecessary.”

“Time is the most valuable thing you have when you’re running a business and to have something like this take away your time, really it’s taking away the most important thing you have to run a business.”

Chris has learned a few lessons from the experience.

“You realize that you might have to spend money on something that’s completely unnecessary. My business partner put it as a cost of doing business. It seems silly that we are the ones that have to pay for someone else’s shot at maybe making a lot of money.”

“You could be right on the law and you could still be in jeopardy,” says Chris. “That doesn’t stop people from suing you and involving you in the cost of defending yourself from a lawsuit.”

“This was somebody’s shot at getting rich. We defended ourselves and did it successfully. It could happen to anybody,” he says, “and you might not be able to defend yourself. What do you do then? You would have to shut down your business or you’d have to take money you’d put elsewhere and your time and put it towards the lawsuit.”

“I’m not sure what can be done except for harsher penalties on attorneys that bring these kinds of frivolous lawsuits against people,” says Chris. “It’s gaming the system. Trying to game the system for your own personal profit is probably something that should be looked into.”