• Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« Hill Staffers Feel Overworked, Unhappy with Office Cultures, Report Finds | Main | The Morning Wrap »

October 24, 2012



Estoy totalmente de acuerdo contigo, creo que te estas dando con una pared, no insistas e invierte donde creas, este foro no es de consulta, se mueve por intereses de unos pocos que hablan del interés personal de lo que debe de hacer un valor y no un estudio de cada valor.


Over here in England, the damages are awarded by the judge. There is a standard scale, though the idea is only to compensate the physical damages. We also have the "loser pays" system.
As a result, awards of more than £500, 000.00 are very rare.

There may be some merit in comparing the different systems.

The eagle eyed will note that Scotland has its own legal system, but there isn't a lot of difference in awards

Mary Kaplan

Hard to believe any jury would award a criminal with any money, let alone 4 million. Fraudsters are out there cheating in every aspect of society. Checks and balances to protect law abiding citizens are a necessary part of the legal system.

Max Kennerly

Shorter version: judges and juries are so stupid they don't know where taxes come from and don't know to deny "absolutely phony" claims.

"Everyone in the world is stupid but me" is rarely a persuasive argument.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad