The cost of an error

Also of note is that one of the other purposes of such a lawsuit is to make sure the business that did this is not around to do it to someone else, and if one can pierce the corporate veil and go after the officers, to make sure they don't do it again either. Additionally, those people being put out of business might cause others in similar situations to think a bit more carefully about their practices.
 
Bell206 said:
Have seen the grief both personally and in other roles. Regardless, to think all tort lawsuits start off strictly as a “money grab” is hardly the truth. What will be interesting is if the pax survivors decide to include the Bryant estate in their claimant.;)
Click to expand...
I can tell you as a plaintiff on a number of lawsuits in the past and presently that this is exactly correct. Some I do even though it does not pay because it is the right thing to do. Others I do both because I think it is right and because it will at least pay the legal bills.
 
Lindberg said:
Shoot, as a lawyer and a potential plaintiff, my own lawyer (and friend) told me what a lawsuit was going to cost and that he thought the defendants would be judgment proof. It likely won't even pay the legal bills. But as I told him, they ****ed me over, and the alternative was zero consequences.
Click to expand...
You have to decide if you can afford the cost and want to pay it as a price of sending a message. As a lawyer I assume your costs are less.

Don't do those often, but the last one I was going to do like this the potential defendant decided it was wise to sign a settlement agreement which admitted responsibility and to make some effort at repayment. So sometimes they work out in some other way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top