> Juries can be overruled; A judge can issue a judgement nothwithstanding a verdict only of no reasonable jury could have reached the verdict on the ecidence p

> Juries can be overruled; A judge can issue a judgement nothwithstanding a verdict only of no reasonable jury could have reached the verdict on the ecidence presented, given the applicable (in this case,as is generally the case in civil cases, “preponderance of the evidence”) standard of proof. That's a very easy standard of proof to meet when only one side presents evidence. Play stupid (intentional default) games, win stupid (larger civil verdict than you would have with even a minimal defense) prizes. > The judge imposing $473 million is ludicrous by itself. Based on US Supreme Court precedent, depending on wilfullness of the conduct and othee specifics of the circumstances (which, based on what was before the judge to consider, it is reasonable to find that even the outer limit was met), punitive damages can be reasonable up to a single digit multiple of actual damages. Here, the punitive damages were around half the actual damages What's your basis for claiming that the punitive award is unreasonable? > Even if Jones was not complaint, compliant my “marijuana in the park” example. What about it? The example fails to be analogous and is irrelevant; it obscures rather than illistrates whatever argument you are trying to make with it, as does whatever that sentence abusing “compliant” and “complaint” above is.