Robbed on the job? YOU'RE FIRED!!

[KabeRinnaul]

Betting on legal strategy. Sue for a huge amount, trust the company to settle out of court to avoid dragging out the PR disaster, collect your now-much-more-reasonable but still put-all-five-kids-through-college amount without extra hassle.

[cewfa]

Lawsuits are beginning to become an American pastime just like baseball, hot dogs, and mom's apple pie.

[Andara Bledin]

Well, the ability for anyone to bring suit is how the American jurisprudence system was designed.

Lawsuits are part of the system as much as any other form of conflict resolution.

[lordlundar]

Lawsuits are beginning to become an American pastime just like baseball, hot dogs, and mom's apple pie.

Beginning? It's been that way for over 20 years.

[Andara Bledin]

Beginning? It's been that way for over 20 years.

Um, yeah, you're missing a digit, there. Try over 200 years.

As I said, the US justice system is designed around the idea of the lawsuit being a semi-common option for redress of grievances.

Oh, yeah, and while I was researching, I found an article talking about how "lawsuits are becoming an American pastime." From 1977. So, yeah, it's kind of like how 'kids these days are so unlike kids of yesteryear' - something that's been said since the dawn of civilization.

[TheHuckster]

I'd make a bet that the number of frivolous lawsuits demanding excessive amounts of money went up as the popularity of duels went down. If the pants lawsuit had happened in 1880, it would have ended with someone shot at high-noon rather than a long drawn out court hearing of epic ridiculousness.

[cewfa]

I was referring to some of the more frivolous and SC-ish type lawsuits in that comment. I just don't think the lady deserves 5.5 million dollars for this situation. They offered her her job back and $2000 in back pay. I would say that she has the right to not take the job and still get the $2000, but $5.5 million smacks of entitlement of "compensation" that is well excessive to the situation, just like a SC would demand "compensation." Of course, a shyster lawyer could be in play here too, but even still, $5.5M is crap. Either take the job and the two grand or don't take it, keep the two grand, and find a different job.

[Gravekeeper]

=I would say that she has the right to not take the job and still get the $2000, but $5.5 million smacks of entitlement of "compensation" that is well excessive to the situation, just like a SC would demand "compensation."

As was mentioned, the idea is not actually to get 5.5 million but to get an out of court settlement. Suing for as much as possible is also part of the grand American lawsuit game. Its basically legal bartering. They don't expect to get what they sue for. Its high balling and betting that either A) The defendant will settle out of court for less to avoid the trouble or B) By aiming high, the final award will get adjusted down by the court to a figure that is still desirable.

You sue for 5.5m and hope the company/court slips you 1m in other words. Its pretty common for the court to adjust the requested damages down. But pretty damn rare or the court to adjust the requested damages up.

So do you ask for more than you'd be happy with in the hopes of getting what you'd be happy with after all is said and done? Or do you ask for what you'd be happy with and risk realizing later that the defendant would have gladly paid out more to settle the case?

Its all part of the the Great US Lawsuit Game and why politicians periodically pay lip service to tort reform. -.-

[Andara Bledin]

You sue for 5.5m and hope the company/court slips you 1m in other words. Its pretty common for the court to adjust the requested damages down. But pretty damn rare or the court to adjust the requested damages up.

This is also why reports of pending criminal charges always tout the max sentences if every charge resulted in a conviction and full sentencing. It's part of the process in attempting to get things closed out before you ever even get to court.

[CriminalMindsRocks]

ok, I'm gonna throw my hat in the ring with an opinion that will likely have all ya'll jumping down my throat

Here's the problem I've always had with corp. & managers drilling into our heads that if someone sticks a gun in our face, to just be good little drones & give it up. Don't be a hero, blah blah

BUT, what happens if I obey that edict, give up the $$ without a fight & then the jackoff with the gun decides to shoot me anyhow on his way out the door just for shits & giggles???

SO, my stance has always been & likely always will be, if I'm alone up front & someone shoves a gun in my face (and me only) demanding $$ then....well...we're gonna dance pal, you might get the money & you might not.

Innocent co-worker/civilian in the possible cross-fire? Here, take the money & go

Now, in saying that, am I saying that I think she should've fought him, HELL NO. She has an unborn child to think of so what she did was the right thing. I have no children/minimal family left so really I'm not that special

*adjusts flame B gone suit*

fire away

[cewfa]

Yeah, you'll say that until you find yourself in the situation. I was all, "I'm going to kick ANYONE'S (caps for emphasis) ass who FUCKS with me." until it happened. It happened so fast that I had ZERO time to react to it and only had time enough to think "is this seriously happening to me?" before I was pistol whipped twice, ordered to give up my wallet, money, cell phone, etc. Then before I could even react to that, I was told to "get the fuck out of there." and was shot at point blank range. Thankfully, there was a metal bar in my seat that caused the bullet to ricochet.

Get a gun you say? Hah. If I had a gun, I would have been dead, because he was on me faster than I could ever hope to draw and pull the trigger. Not to mention that if he didn't shoot me, one of his four buddies would have.

[Racket_Man]

BUT, what happens if I obey that edict, give up the $$ without a fight & then the jackoff with the gun decides to shoot me anyhow on his way out the door just for shits & giggles???

THAT is exactly what happened to one of our drivers who got robbed one night about 2 years ago when 3 guys jumped him and kicked the shit out of him when he did not have "enough money on him) and he was in the hospital for like 9 days PLUS had to have extensive dental work and deal with sever concussion PLUS the PTSD.

All these guy got was literally a couple of dollars and are NOW in prison for 10 years. VERY lucky that the cops eventually caught them. Most times they are NOT caught.

This is the chance you take in ANY job or just walking down the street these days. Not just from robbery but also from disgruntled ex-co-workers, crazy person ramming a truck into the side of a house and raping a baby sitter, some wacko who does not even know you shoots up workplace because he received messages from Curly Howard telling him to "Purge the laughs from the evil place", etc.

[s_stabeler]

I think it's more along the lines of "if you fight back, thye WILL kill you, if you don't, they MIGHT not"- it's true in certain circumstances. That, and generally the robber isn't the only person in the store- if it ended up in a shootout, then other customers could ge thit. That, and considering that lawsuits ARE fairly common, it's not impossible the robber would sue if he got shot & survived. Yes, the robber would probably lose, but it would cost the store more than the robbery would.

as for lawsuits VS duels, that's not actually the case. Duels were rarely about money- duels were a matter of honor, usually. ( basically, the idea was that if you insulted someone, a duel meant you were willing to risk your life for what you said- duels weren't usually to the death, but accidents could happen.)

[Andara Bledin]

Actually, in most jurisdictions in the US, you do not have any legal recourse to bring suit while in the commission of a crime. Additionally, typically any damages suffered by anyone else in connection with the commission of the crime blow back onto those committing it, regardless of circumstances.

This last was abused to hell when a quartet of kids broke into a house that they thought was empty, the owner was present and killed one of the kids, and the remaining three were then tried for his death...

[s_stabeler]

it doesn't stop the robbers trying, though, and since in the US, each side pays it's own legal bills, the legal bills to fight the lawsuit might be more expensive than the amount that would be stolen.

I'm just saying what the justification for "don't try to fight a robbery" policies are, anyway.