5 ms·

Charter told to pay $7.3b in damages after cable installer murders grandmother

30 points by avastel 4y ago

HomeDeLaPot 4y ago
Dang, those jurors must be really upset about Spectrum's monopolistic practices...
treesknees 4y ago
I don't say this to diminish the value of human life, because there certainly is no amount of money in the world that can bring back a murdered loved one, but I'm wondering how they come up with the value of $7 billion? I mean that will certainly get the attention of service providers, I'm just surprised at the amount.
- missedthecue 4y ago
  Juries always award huge punitive damages. Like when a jury awarded that employee of Tesla $137 million because he was harassed at work. A judge will always reduce this amount to a more reasonable level.
  - jstummbillig 4y ago
    Okay but still, why.
    - missedthecue 4y ago
      Our peers are bad at math or have no conceptual grasp of money in the millions or billions? Maybe juries know a judge will reduce the amount so it's some kind of game theory to ensure they don't low-ball the victim. I'm not certain. An even better example is BMW, Inc. v Gore where a man sued because the brand new car he purchased had been partially repainted to cover damage caused while it was being shipped to the dealer. The jury awarded him $4 million in punitive damages. BMW appealed and the supreme court agreed it was ridiculous.
    - olyjohn 4y ago
      Only guessing here... but maybe they wanted a sum that would actually hurt Charter. Not some paltry few million bucks that they can just write off as an expense.
_-david-_ 4y ago
That seems a bit excessive. I understand there is some emotional damage due to the stolen checks and the billed amount going to collections, but $7 billion? The lady who was killed was over the average life expectancy!
- Nexxxeh 4y ago
  A question not a statement, but are punitive damages set to a level where they should be felt by the guilty party? If you don't set it in the billions, Charter wouldn't even notice it. Their yearly profits are in the billions. $7 billion is very possibly less than the profit made between the murder of the woman (2019) and the verdict (now).
  - hnburnsy 4y ago
    Just like taxes, companies don't pay or feel them, they either reduce expenses (example by paying their employees less) or increase revenue (example increase prices to consumers). In the end, consumers and employees are the ones suffering the punitive damages.
    - ryandrake 4y ago
      > paying their employees less If they could profitably pay employees less, why wouldn’t they just do that and not wait for a judgment? > increase prices to consumers Same: If they could just do that any time, why wouldn’t they, if it would result in more profit? Why wait for a big expense like a judgment?
      - jrsj 4y ago
        Waiting for it to happen isn’t necessary for it to be priced in. In many cases companies probably anticipate these costs like any other. If you do something that risks a fine it’s because you think the reward is worth it. In cases where there is a fine, the goal is the same as any other expense: to pass costs onto either consumers or employees in order to protect shareholders. In cases where a penalty is surprising and/or severe, they might not be able to fully pass on costs to those people, profitability suffers, and the shareholders pay via investment losses or at least reduced gains. Corporate leadership could get forced out if they piss off shareholders too much, otherwise the only cost for them to pay is reduced pay from equity based compensation or performance bonuses…and only if the fines are in excess of the gains made by breaking the law in the first place.
hnburnsy 4y ago
If this verdict stands we will all pay as service companies will raise rates to reserve or insure against potential litigation losses like this.
- killingtime74 4y ago
  So you should, most companies insure against crimes their employees commit
cto_official 4y ago
7.3 billion :o did I hear it right ? Is it going to only one individual ?
- tcmart14 4y ago
  That is the confusing part. I don't know if that is the case here, but with lawsuits similar, the amounts seem really high and the reporting doesn't fully explain why, which I wish would change. Some people will get rewarded at face value handsomely. But in reality, it isn't the case since in some cases most of what is being "rewarded" might just be going to attorney fees and other costs of the litigation itself.
yummypaint 4y ago
This isn't actually that steep if you compare it to a human being getting convicted of manslaughter. The fraction of a person's life and income taken away by damages fines and incarceration are much larger than what charter will (not actually) lose.
- j4kp07 4y ago
spicymaki 4y ago
I personally believe that the value of a human life is priceless (in a subjective sense). However in an objective sense you can use a heuristic to figure out damages a company should payout. I would love to know how the jury came up with that number.
- Ekaros 4y ago
  Specially when in this case the victim was 83 year old... Objectively there isn't much life time earnings left there or even qualitative years. So I don't know what objective metric could get it to that level.
Ekaros 4y ago
357 million to family and 7 billion punitive damages. Those sound really really high...

30 points by avastel 4y ago

Dang, those jurors must be really upset about Spectrum's monopolistic practices...

I don't say this to diminish the value of human life, because there certainly is no amount of money in the world that can bring back a murdered loved one, but I'm wondering how they come up with the value of $7 billion? I mean that will certainly get the attention of service providers, I'm just surprised at the amount.

missedthecue 4y ago
Juries always award huge punitive damages. Like when a jury awarded that employee of Tesla $137 million because he was harassed at work. A judge will always reduce this amount to a more reasonable level.
- jstummbillig 4y ago
  Okay but still, why.
  - missedthecue 4y ago
    Our peers are bad at math or have no conceptual grasp of money in the millions or billions? Maybe juries know a judge will reduce the amount so it's some kind of game theory to ensure they don't low-ball the victim. I'm not certain. An even better example is BMW, Inc. v Gore where a man sued because the brand new car he purchased had been partially repainted to cover damage caused while it was being shipped to the dealer. The jury awarded him $4 million in punitive damages. BMW appealed and the supreme court agreed it was ridiculous.
  - olyjohn 4y ago
    Only guessing here... but maybe they wanted a sum that would actually hurt Charter. Not some paltry few million bucks that they can just write off as an expense.

_-david-_ 4y ago

That seems a bit excessive. I understand there is some emotional damage due to the stolen checks and the billed amount going to collections, but $7 billion? The lady who was killed was over the average life expectancy!

Nexxxeh 4y ago
A question not a statement, but are punitive damages set to a level where they should be felt by the guilty party? If you don't set it in the billions, Charter wouldn't even notice it. Their yearly profits are in the billions. $7 billion is very possibly less than the profit made between the murder of the woman (2019) and the verdict (now).
- hnburnsy 4y ago
  Just like taxes, companies don't pay or feel them, they either reduce expenses (example by paying their employees less) or increase revenue (example increase prices to consumers). In the end, consumers and employees are the ones suffering the punitive damages.
  - ryandrake 4y ago
    > paying their employees less If they could profitably pay employees less, why wouldn’t they just do that and not wait for a judgment? > increase prices to consumers Same: If they could just do that any time, why wouldn’t they, if it would result in more profit? Why wait for a big expense like a judgment?
    - jrsj 4y ago
      Waiting for it to happen isn’t necessary for it to be priced in. In many cases companies probably anticipate these costs like any other. If you do something that risks a fine it’s because you think the reward is worth it. In cases where there is a fine, the goal is the same as any other expense: to pass costs onto either consumers or employees in order to protect shareholders. In cases where a penalty is surprising and/or severe, they might not be able to fully pass on costs to those people, profitability suffers, and the shareholders pay via investment losses or at least reduced gains. Corporate leadership could get forced out if they piss off shareholders too much, otherwise the only cost for them to pay is reduced pay from equity based compensation or performance bonuses…and only if the fines are in excess of the gains made by breaking the law in the first place.

hnburnsy 4y ago

If this verdict stands we will all pay as service companies will raise rates to reserve or insure against potential litigation losses like this.

killingtime74 4y ago
So you should, most companies insure against crimes their employees commit

cto_official 4y ago

7.3 billion :o did I hear it right ? Is it going to only one individual ?

tcmart14 4y ago
That is the confusing part. I don't know if that is the case here, but with lawsuits similar, the amounts seem really high and the reporting doesn't fully explain why, which I wish would change. Some people will get rewarded at face value handsomely. But in reality, it isn't the case since in some cases most of what is being "rewarded" might just be going to attorney fees and other costs of the litigation itself.

yummypaint 4y ago

This isn't actually that steep if you compare it to a human being getting convicted of manslaughter. The fraction of a person's life and income taken away by damages fines and incarceration are much larger than what charter will (not actually) lose.

j4kp07 4y ago

spicymaki 4y ago

I personally believe that the value of a human life is priceless (in a subjective sense). However in an objective sense you can use a heuristic to figure out damages a company should payout. I would love to know how the jury came up with that number.

Ekaros 4y ago
Specially when in this case the victim was 83 year old... Objectively there isn't much life time earnings left there or even qualitative years. So I don't know what objective metric could get it to that level.

Ekaros 4y ago

357 million to family and 7 billion punitive damages. Those sound really really high...