4 ms·
That seems like a very uncharitable characterization. I haven't followed the lawsuit closely, but is it not possible she sincerely felt she was discriminated ag
by eli 11y ago
That seems like a very uncharitable characterization. I haven't followed the lawsuit closely, but is it not possible she sincerely felt she was discriminated against when she filed the case? Surely you don't think everyone who loses a lawsuit was automatically "crying wolf" in the complaint, right?
- ojbyrne 11y agoPerhaps uncharitable, but her argument seems like grasping at straws. She's well educated, and had good representation, there's little likelihood she didn't know the risks going in.
- late2part 11y agoRead about her husband's background, and you may perceive a pattern.
- shawn-butler 11y agoLoser pays is a system well-established in modern legal jurisprudence. Nearly every Western democracy, other than the United States, follows the "English" rule. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_rule_%28attorney%27s_fees%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_rule_%28attorney%27s_f...
- redthrowaway 11y agoThe jury found that she was, in effect, crying wolf. The evidence against her claims of discrimination was overwhelming, to the point where the jury felt she should be responsible for KP's legal costs.
- CyberDildonics 11y agoWell... it turns out that she feels a lot of things that aren't true.