SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: donjuan_demarco who wrote (37685)9/18/2000 8:56:53 AM
From: donjuan_demarco  Respond to of 769667
 
When people argue in favor of damage caps, what they are really saying is "we cannot trust a jury to make the right decision in these matters."

Now, every now and then a jury does make a ridiculous decision (the OJ trial, some of the more outlandish personal injury awards).

But the jury system has worked well for hundreds of years, and I am in favor of retaining it.



To: donjuan_demarco who wrote (37685)9/18/2000 9:04:44 AM
From: kvkkc1  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769667
 
Why allow unlimited damages? Let a jury decide how much to award up to a cap. Why waste more time up the appeals chain? More money for lawyers.knc



To: donjuan_demarco who wrote (37685)9/18/2000 9:53:54 AM
From: Ish  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769667
 
<<Because you are taking that decision away from the jury.>>

You mean the same as a judge setting aside a verdict or the defendant filing an appeal?


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News