A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

ZZZooommm rant latest



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old September 7th 03, 03:25 PM
Eric Miller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Juan E Jimenez" wrote
Actually, he said that if "successfully sued" means prevailed, then who
prevailed against him? (paraphrased; he actually wrote it from the

losing
respondent's point of view). I haven't seen any evidence that his

statement is
untrue.


The evidence is right there in front of your eyes. When you agree to

settle
a suit and pay damages, you lose.


Not taking sides, but there's generally no admission of wrong-doing when a
settlement is reached.

Something else to consider in regards to the "big" settlement is that they
had liability insurance, therefore the insurance company was named as
co-defendant, and they might have driven the decision to settle.

The cost of settling could have smaller than the cost of defending a case
and appeals that might've dragged on for a couple years.
Better a known figure now which you can write off, than an unknown amount
(for both defense and outcome) in the future.

It also could've been an insignificant sum to the insurance company...
remember, insurances companies have insurance too (called re-insurance) to
spread their risk. (And re-insurers have insurance, etc, etc... it can even
come full circle, which makes calculating responsibility for payouts fun and
interesting.)

So it could be just as fair to say that the suit was successfully defended.

Just because money changed hands doesn't mean bupkis about the merits of the
suit.

And frankly speaking, I wouldn't trust a "jury of my peers" to decide if it
was day or night.
These are the same "peers" that bankrupted Dow with a $3.2 billion payout
for silicone breast implants which showed no scientific or statistical
evidence of causing disease (systemic or otherwise).

As a disinterested third party, I also found Chuck to be very forthcoming
about his past and current litigation, which is a far cry from catching him
in a lie.
Did he supply it in his initial post? No, but then it wasn't relevant.
Similarly, you'll notice I haven't provided a list of my civil, criminal and
traffic violations

Eric "you can't flame me... I said "breast" :-)"


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Latest Pipistrel Motorglider Newsletter Uploaded Michael Coates Home Built 1 September 16th 03 06:04 PM
so what is the latest word on Sport Pilot ??? Gilan Home Built 12 September 7th 03 11:14 PM
Latest Ripon & Fisk (OSH) Updates Jim Weir Home Built 4 July 20th 03 10:59 PM
Latest Newsletter Michael Coates Home Built 3 July 15th 03 10:04 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.