5 ms·

130 millions damage payment to ONE person? Is that not an insanely ridiculous amount? Such things are unimaginable in Europe or elsewhere.

ChainOfFools 5y ago
how lucky we are as a civilization that technology has not yet made a similar punitive equation feasible for time as it is for money. i.e., imagine if it worked this way for penalty of incarceration, where your mugger forfeits 10 years of their life, and transfers them to you, extending your own by the same amount - less attorneys' fees, of course.
- tmmx 5y ago
  https://m.imdb.com/title/tt1637688/ https://m.imdb.com/title/tt1637688/
sitkack 5y ago
ONE corporation, will it notice?
somerandomqaguy 5y ago
Washington Post is saying it's $6.9M in emotional damages and $130M in punitive damages. US Gov case info is here: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-06748/summary https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-06...
- sayonaraman 5y ago
  just write a graffiti on a restroom wall and walk out a rich man
carlivar 5y ago
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punitive_damages https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punitive_damages Basically, the amount is intended to set an example and prevent re-occurence.
- chance_bear 5y ago
  There’s also a significant problem with a verdict creep, where juries set progressively higher punitive damages to set an example. For example, damages for trucking accidents have grown substantially over the last decade. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/24/rise-in-nuclear-verdicts-in-lawsuits-threatens-trucking-industry.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/24/rise-in-nuclear-verdicts-in-...
_moof 5y ago
This is a signal that the jury believes Tesla's people are remorseless and/or the violation was especially severe.
- randyrand 5y ago
  And if it obscenely hurts the company, they leave. Two wrongs don't make a right.
  - _moof 5y ago
    I support meaningful punishment of companies that have willfully, egregiously hostile work environments.
    - randyrand 5y ago
      I don't think anyone disagrees about that point. Punishments must be in-line with the evidence. Otherwise you are wrongfully hurting more people. How does that do any good?
      - _moof 5y ago
        I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. A jury weighed the evidence—evidence which no one on this forum has seen—and awarded this amount.
        randyrand 5y ago
        There are numerous articles that elaborate on evidence. The bloomberg article linked has some, as does a tesla link above. It's worth a read if you haven't read much about this case yet.
      - yazaddaruvala 5y ago
        The legal system was not designed to neutralize the damages. The legal system has been designed to neutralize the damages and leverage scapegoating to deter future cases. e.g. in this case the jury is basically telling Tesla “… is very not profitable. It is your fiduciary responsibility to investors to ensure this never happens again.” You might disagree with that design of the courts, but changing how the US legal system works is more than a lot difficult. If you do take on this challenge, I would suggest starting with helping reduce punishments for individuals before focusing on reducing the punishment for corporations. Hopefully the same strategies for change will “help” both situations.
olliej 5y ago
This is like the hot coffee lady. The purpose for the large fine is to punish the company and prevent them from being able to just carry on as they were with a small amount set aside for lawsuits.
- ALittleLight 5y ago
  The hot coffee lady wound up in hospital with severe burns. McDonald's had a pattern of overheating coffee to disguise poor taste and they continued it knowing they had seriously injured multiple customers. In this instance a factory worker seems to have have overheard bad language and seen it on graffiti in the bathroom. Pretty different.
  - XorNot 5y ago
    The OP still shouldn't be getting downvoted because they're right: she was only seeking $20,000 to cover medical bills for treatment of severe burns originally, in the course of the case McDonalds decided to go on a media campaign about it against her (and succeeded) but during the course of the case got demolished by the prosecution who conclusively showed that they were aware of the danger, had injured others, and had no justifiable reason for preparing the product the way they did. The final settlement was - as the OP notes - about punitive damages, which they very much deserved. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restau...
  - Misinf0rmation 5y ago
    Ironic! This is exactly like the hot coffee lady. You, and almost everyone else, is going to read Tesla's interpretation and assume the judgement is overboard without ever reading the complaint. Actually, that's exactly what all of the current comments on here are circling towards. Turns out Facebook isn't the only place with rampant misinformation. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.319709/gov.uscourts.cand.319709.57.0_1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.31...
    - ALittleLight 5y ago
tfehring 5y ago
Jury awards to individuals against corporations have been skyrocketing over the last decade or so. In the insurance industry it's referred to as "social inflation" and is a pretty hot topic right now. People in the industry were shocked by a record $411 million award last October [0], only for that record to be shattered by a $1 billion award not even a year later [1]. My pet theory is that it's mostly driven by attitudes that corporations have too much power coupled with increased inaction by the government entities that could be addressing all of that corporate power. An increase in litigation financing is probably a big factor too. There's lots of firmer legal analysis out there by people who, unlike me, are actually qualified to perform that analysis (e.g. [2]). Naturally it's all somewhat speculative, but there are some interesting solid-ish statistics, for example: > A national survey conducted by Sound Jury Consulting in 2019 found three-quarters of respondents eligible for jury service stated they would decide a case based on their own personal beliefs of right or wrong if those beliefs conflicted with the law as instructed by the judge. The number is higher for millennials. [0] https://cdllife.com/2020/single-truck-company-slapped-with-nuclear-411-million-verdict-following-45-vehicle-pileup/ https://cdllife.com/2020/single-truck-company-slapped-with-n... [1] https://www.thetrucker.com/trucking-news/the-nation/inside-a-nuclear-verdict-florida-jury-renders-1-billion-ruling https://www.thetrucker.com/trucking-news/the-nation/inside-a... [2] https://www.hinshawlaw.com/assets/htmldocuments/Articles/The%20Legal%20Trends%20Behind%20Social%20Inflation%20In%20Insurance.pdf https://www.hinshawlaw.com/assets/htmldocuments/Articles/The...
new_realist 5y ago
Tesla is worth almost $800B dollars. This award won’t cause a blip in their culture or working conditions.
Shadonototra 5y ago
Sounds like the story is very fishy, maybe some money laundering

ChainOfFools 5y ago

how lucky we are as a civilization that technology has not yet made a similar punitive equation feasible for time as it is for money. i.e., imagine if it worked this way for penalty of incarceration, where your mugger forfeits 10 years of their life, and transfers them to you, extending your own by the same amount - less attorneys' fees, of course.

tmmx 5y ago
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt1637688/ https://m.imdb.com/title/tt1637688/

sitkack 5y ago

ONE corporation, will it notice?

somerandomqaguy 5y ago

Washington Post is saying it's $6.9M in emotional damages and $130M in punitive damages. US Gov case info is here: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-06748/summary https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-06...

sayonaraman 5y ago
just write a graffiti on a restroom wall and walk out a rich man

carlivar 5y ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punitive_damages https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punitive_damages Basically, the amount is intended to set an example and prevent re-occurence.

chance_bear 5y ago
There’s also a significant problem with a verdict creep, where juries set progressively higher punitive damages to set an example. For example, damages for trucking accidents have grown substantially over the last decade. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/24/rise-in-nuclear-verdicts-in-lawsuits-threatens-trucking-industry.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/24/rise-in-nuclear-verdicts-in-...

_moof 5y ago

This is a signal that the jury believes Tesla's people are remorseless and/or the violation was especially severe.

randyrand 5y ago
And if it obscenely hurts the company, they leave. Two wrongs don't make a right.
- _moof 5y ago
  I support meaningful punishment of companies that have willfully, egregiously hostile work environments.
  - randyrand 5y ago
    I don't think anyone disagrees about that point. Punishments must be in-line with the evidence. Otherwise you are wrongfully hurting more people. How does that do any good?
    - _moof 5y ago
      I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. A jury weighed the evidence—evidence which no one on this forum has seen—and awarded this amount.
      - randyrand 5y ago
        There are numerous articles that elaborate on evidence. The bloomberg article linked has some, as does a tesla link above. It's worth a read if you haven't read much about this case yet.
    - yazaddaruvala 5y ago
      The legal system was not designed to neutralize the damages. The legal system has been designed to neutralize the damages and leverage scapegoating to deter future cases. e.g. in this case the jury is basically telling Tesla “… is very not profitable. It is your fiduciary responsibility to investors to ensure this never happens again.” You might disagree with that design of the courts, but changing how the US legal system works is more than a lot difficult. If you do take on this challenge, I would suggest starting with helping reduce punishments for individuals before focusing on reducing the punishment for corporations. Hopefully the same strategies for change will “help” both situations.

olliej 5y ago

This is like the hot coffee lady. The purpose for the large fine is to punish the company and prevent them from being able to just carry on as they were with a small amount set aside for lawsuits.

ALittleLight 5y ago
The hot coffee lady wound up in hospital with severe burns. McDonald's had a pattern of overheating coffee to disguise poor taste and they continued it knowing they had seriously injured multiple customers. In this instance a factory worker seems to have have overheard bad language and seen it on graffiti in the bathroom. Pretty different.
- XorNot 5y ago
  The OP still shouldn't be getting downvoted because they're right: she was only seeking $20,000 to cover medical bills for treatment of severe burns originally, in the course of the case McDonalds decided to go on a media campaign about it against her (and succeeded) but during the course of the case got demolished by the prosecution who conclusively showed that they were aware of the danger, had injured others, and had no justifiable reason for preparing the product the way they did. The final settlement was - as the OP notes - about punitive damages, which they very much deserved. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restau...
- Misinf0rmation 5y ago
  Ironic! This is exactly like the hot coffee lady. You, and almost everyone else, is going to read Tesla's interpretation and assume the judgement is overboard without ever reading the complaint. Actually, that's exactly what all of the current comments on here are circling towards. Turns out Facebook isn't the only place with rampant misinformation. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.319709/gov.uscourts.cand.319709.57.0_1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.31...
  - ALittleLight 5y ago

tfehring 5y ago

Jury awards to individuals against corporations have been skyrocketing over the last decade or so. In the insurance industry it's referred to as "social inflation" and is a pretty hot topic right now. People in the industry were shocked by a record $411 million award last October [0], only for that record to be shattered by a $1 billion award not even a year later [1]. My pet theory is that it's mostly driven by attitudes that corporations have too much power coupled with increased inaction by the government entities that could be addressing all of that corporate power. An increase in litigation financing is probably a big factor too. There's lots of firmer legal analysis out there by people who, unlike me, are actually qualified to perform that analysis (e.g. [2]). Naturally it's all somewhat speculative, but there are some interesting solid-ish statistics, for example: > A national survey conducted by Sound Jury Consulting in 2019 found three-quarters of respondents eligible for jury service stated they would decide a case based on their own personal beliefs of right or wrong if those beliefs conflicted with the law as instructed by the judge. The number is higher for millennials. [0] https://cdllife.com/2020/single-truck-company-slapped-with-nuclear-411-million-verdict-following-45-vehicle-pileup/ https://cdllife.com/2020/single-truck-company-slapped-with-n... [1] https://www.thetrucker.com/trucking-news/the-nation/inside-a-nuclear-verdict-florida-jury-renders-1-billion-ruling https://www.thetrucker.com/trucking-news/the-nation/inside-a... [2] https://www.hinshawlaw.com/assets/htmldocuments/Articles/The%20Legal%20Trends%20Behind%20Social%20Inflation%20In%20Insurance.pdf https://www.hinshawlaw.com/assets/htmldocuments/Articles/The...

new_realist 5y ago

Tesla is worth almost $800B dollars. This award won’t cause a blip in their culture or working conditions.

Shadonototra 5y ago

Sounds like the story is very fishy, maybe some money laundering