Heid the Ba' wrote:A question that has nothing to do with the merits of the case. I asked this repeatedly on BAUT but no-one ever answered:
Who get the punitive damages in a case like this?
And a follow up question: If the plaintiff, why?
Heid the Ba' wrote:They get the compensatory damages (the $2,9 mill) that is fair enough; but why should they get the punitive damages? They have already been compensated. In this case the punitive damages are meaningless as the defendants don't have the assets but in tobacco cases where a company can be fined tens of millions in punitive damages why should that go to the plaintiff?
Heid the Ba' wrote:but why should they get the punitive damages?
Heid the Ba' wrote:In your example the first instance is a civil matter, the second criminal.
Heid the Ba' wrote:This may be due to different jurisdictions but I don't see how a civil case can be used to impose a sanction for a criminal act.
MM_Dandy wrote:Good questions, Heid. As far as to whom punitive damages are awarded to, I'm not sure who else besides the plaintiff would qualify.
As far as the church filing bankruptcy...that could be quite interesting. I'm not sure why they didn't file before the trail started, since doing so would have stayed the trial. I'm also not sure that filing for bankruptcy would prevent them from being liable if they were to protest again while in bankruptcy. But, I'm not familiar at all with bankruptcy law and from what little I've read on the internet, non-profit bankruptcy proceedings are somewhat unexplored territory in our courts.
troubleagain wrote:I'm curious, Heid, who you think should get the punitive damages if not the victim?
Return to Current Events and Politics
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests