Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Mar 5, 2:56 pm, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net
wrote:
Ash Wyllie wrote:

Better to just ban punitive damages.

I disagree. There is a place for punitive damages. Let's take an
manufacture as an example. Company A finds a design flaw. They do
the math and decide that it would be cheaper to pay out X number of
damage awards in the future than to recall the items and fix them.
This is a case where punitive damages should be levied.

On the other side Company B has a problem with a product and before
a recall could take place there are injuries. This is where no
punitive damages should be levied.

One other thing. The lawyers shouldn't get a cent of punitive
damages.

I think you missed the point. Yes, we should have punitive damages.
However, they should not be a lotto ticket for the claimant. If a
regulator found a problem in the design would they randomly find a car
owner and give them the fine money? Why should the legal system work
that way???

-Robert

No I understood the point of the message I replied to exactly. Hell, I even
quoted it but I'll do so again.

Ash Wyllie wrote:

Better to just ban punitive damages.