Did you bother actually READING the article you posted?
I CAN'T UNDERSTAND THAT AMOUNT. UNLESS THE DRIVER WAS IMPAIRED OR WORKING BEYOND LEGAL HOURS OR SOMEHOW OTHERWISE OPERATING ILLEGALLY. THE ARTICLE DID STATE THAT THE VEHICLE WAS EITHER STOPPED OR OPERATING AT A SLOW SPEED. AFTER DRIVING A TRUCK FOR OVER 40 YEARS I DO NOT SEE HOW THE FED EX DRIVER WAS AT FAULT. THE NORMAL CONSENSUS WOULD BE THAT NO ONE SHOULD EXPECT A CAR TO BE STOPPED OR BARELY MOVING ON A 65 MPH FREEWAY.Certainly seems excessive, to me. Especially considering FedEx was neither the owner nor the operator of the truck.
"Primus added, however, that the panel may have believed the award was excessive, but that under the state's statutes was bound to uphold the verdict. The language used in the ruling leaves the "door wide open" for the state Supreme Court to reduce the award's amount, he wrote."
Perhaps you can explain it.Did you bother actually READING the article you posted?
Dayum. Would've expected that statement from the more wise clandestine_ice...Tort reform... a long time coming. These jury awards are just beset with recklessness
Dayum. Would've expected that statement from the more wise clandestine_ice...
So if Fred Smith is hit and killed by a truck his heirs should only get 165 million, because anybody should be able to make it on a 10th of that?Clearly everyone feels horrible for all involved, but I find this to be an exorbanite amount of money. I agree there should be a cap on what is paid out. We can all appreciate how much our family means to us, but is $165 million going to bring them back? Anyone should be able to make it on a tenth of that. Just my opinion.
So a person that makes 14 million a year and has 20 years he can work should only be compensated 65 million? No compensation To the family for the loss of their loved one? No punitive damages?His heirs should not get $165 million in my opinion. I think that's an exorbanite amount of money. It's not the point that someone can make it on a tenth of that, which you could, the point is that what amount is too much? If you reward a family, say 16.5 million, I feel like that's fair. You can never bring a loved one back, but bankrupting companies for accidents isn't the answer either. I feel like there should be a limit. That's all, my opinion. Feel free to agree or disagree as you like, just think a limit needs to be set on these sort of things.
Regardless of whos at fault,the heir's heirs will be dead before this award is paid, lawyers will see to this.Some things to consider. This case has/had some significant factors contributing to the accident. Vehicle was traveling very slow, or was stopped, in a lane of travel. At night. The driver of the commercial vehicle was not even employed by FedEx, nor was FedEx the owner or operator.
One question that seems valid: should "damages" be awarded based on actual negligence, and actual damage, or simply based on the party's ability to pay? The later seems like a Marxist method of determining liable. From each according to their ability...
This seem like a case based most heavily on emotion, rather than facts, IMHO.
Under contract to Fed Ex makes FX the operatoroperator.
Although the contractor is under contract to FedEx to pull their trailers, the contractor also hires his own driver to operate the truck, thus making the contractor the operator IMO. FedEx owns the trailers and the trailers couldn’t have caused injury unless hooked to the contractor’s truck.Under contract to Fed Ex makes FX the operator
I'm going to say I respect your opinion, and I have mine and leave it at that.So a person that makes 14 million a year and has 20 years he can work should only be compensated 65 million? No compensation To the family for the loss of their loved one? No punitive damages?
The article makes no mention of driver fatigue, Company pressure, or anything related to that.If you cap awards, then the companies get the stats guys together and determine what monetary level of risk that they are willing to live with. NASA did it with the shuttle program. The stats guys told NASA management that the odds said that the program would lose several shuttles and crews but NASA was willing to eat that potential cost as a cost of doing the program.
https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-hist...pace-shuttle-a-case-of-subjective-engineering
Companies are the same, regardless what their product is. They may be willing to live with the risk of paying out 16.5 million, as the cost of doing business, and may continue doing something reasonable people, a jury, may consider risky. Put the sword of massive door closing and turn out the lights type of judgments, over their heads, and maybe the company management may look in another direction. Did Fedex put this driver under a lot of pressure to make her run? I bet FedEx is reviewing run timetables as we speak.