4 ms·
tldr: most plaintiffs settled for peanuts (the judge didn't believe the theater was to blame or could have reasonably prevented the massacre), the others went
by lintiness 10y ago
tldr: most plaintiffs settled for peanuts (the judge didn't believe the theater was to blame or could have reasonably prevented the massacre), the others went against judicial advice and ate cinemark's attorney's fees.
- celticninja 10y agoThat TL:DR is inaccurate. All plaintiffs agreed to settle for a share of $150k rather than face the prospect of paying the legal costs of the theatre. One plaintiff (who was one of the plaintiffs getting a larger share) refused the deal at the final minute which meant there was no settlement for anyone. The next day the judge found for the theater and costs were assigned to the plaintiffs. At which stage there were only 4 left on the case as the others had withdrawn so im not sure if the 700k was between all original defendants or the 4 remaining ones.
- kahnpro 10y agoI don't understand how they can just withdraw after an attempt at settlement but before the decision was made. Seems to me like all 41 should be on the hook for those legal fees.
- celticninja 10y agoBut 40 of the 41 would have accepted the settlement so why should they be on the hook for the fees when only one refused the settlement.
- kahnpro 10y agoBecause they're a part of the lawsuit? Refusing the settlement doesn't mean the lawsuit is lost.
- celticninja 10y agodid you read the article? All this is explained. The lawsuit was lost, the judge had pretty much told them he would be giving a decision in favour of the defendants the next day hence the need to agree a settlement.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]