“Just... I can’t believe the appeals court sided with her on this.”
The problem is a woman or child is “injured” and directly in front of the jury. The other side is a faceless “rich” corporation with a smart-ass sarcastic lawyer representing them. How heartless can a juror be? Afterall, no one is injured if this faceless corporation helps out. The injured are after all poor, innocent, helpless people. There really is no defense against a jury intent on helping these poor people. Now, if the jury had to pay...different story. They complainants are evil vampires who need to suck it up and just go away.
Ironically, major corporations like Geico began requiring their customers to waive their rights in civil court and agree to abide by arbitration decisions for the reasons you describe.
“Now, if the jury had to pay...”
General, ... they will pay ... when their premiums go up and policy coverage is updated to exclude this type of behavior.
That’s part of it yes, but the jury also should think about the rates they pay and understand this will cause a flurry of copycat claims now.
What about all the people who get shot in a car, are they now able to claim a death benefit from the insurance? Knocked up in the back seat, medical bills for the delivery?
That the appeals court didn’t knock the amount down is mind boggling also, this is so much worse than the hot coffee McDonald’s case IMHO.