A New York Times article on possible loser-pays legislation, unable to determine the actual content of the legislation, still manages to find a defense lawyer, a plaintiffs' lawyer, and a law professor to speak out against the bill, without anyone being asked to make the case for the bill. If a Texas legislator's op-ed on the subject is any clue—"A plaintiff should be required to pay the defendant's legal fees in cases where a court determines that a lawsuit is groundless or where a jury determines a suit is frivolous"—the bill will be pretty weak gruel without an expansion of the definition of "frivolous."