2 ms·
Well that's not the point of damages. Compensatory damages are paid the the person that suffered in compensation of the suffering caused. Punitive damages are p
by jonathankoren 7y ago
Well that's not the point of damages. Compensatory damages are paid the the person that suffered in compensation of the suffering caused. Punitive damages are punishment. Remedial action isn't always ordered (You can always roll the dice on enforcement again, and probably get even worse punitive damages for being a repeat offender.), but remedial action is always separate, and it's not up the court to decide how much you're going to spend on compliance. That's your job.
- mlyle 7y agoThe whole point of qui tam and pseudo-qui tam statutes like the ADA (with regimes of minimum damages, recovery of legal fees, etc) -- is to encourage private parties to do enforcement that will compel the desired behavior.
- jonathankoren 7y agoWell I would have thought the pain of having to pay damages would have been enough to encourage remedial action to avoid a similar situation in the future. Especially since the damages would be even higher the second time since it would be flagrant violation.
- mlyle 7y agoIn this case, the remedial action is not economically possible, and the business is closing the location instead. A court would likely agree that there was no violation-- but at how much cost of legal fees? And the potential downside of the court disagreeing is even greater. It's no-win for someone facing one of these dubious actions. You can: A) fight and incur huge costs coupled with unreasonable amounts of risk, B) capitulate and settle and try to remediate, or C) just fold entirely.