3 ms·

No, look - I get the general idea why the world isn’t the way it could have been. I am asking “what is the logical reasoning behind the decision of the judge i

• lotsofpulp 7y ago
  The difficulty in being able to assign a numerical value to damages is a big problem, as it allows the defense to contest the claims of the plaintiff very easily. At that point, it just becomes a situation of the plaintiff (and their lawyers) figuring out the likelihood of winning the case multiplied by the winnings, and it wouldn't make sense for the plaintiffs to keep arguing for the maximum (or real value) of damages since it's not "provable" and then you're stuck in appeals and whatnot. I wouldn't think the judge in the case can actually do anything in cases where the plaintiffs and defendants reach an accord, or at least the corruption needs to rise to a level higher than what is seen in this case.
  • pmiller2 7y ago
    I’ve said this before, but assigning monetary damages is easy: poll Equifax’s attorneys (and maybe their execs) about how much it would take for them to be willing to release their entire Equifax file into the public record. Then, actually do it — introduce their entire credit files into the case record. Take the average amount from the poll, multiply by the number of people affected, and there’s your number.