To: sportutegrl
Okay, they may have been wronged, but how to the tune of $3,000,000 were they damaged???
4 posted on
12/20/2005 4:36:53 AM PST by
DB
(©)
To: DB
DB wrote:
Okay, they may have been wronged, but how to the tune of $3,000,000 were they damaged???
Divide by four, it's 750 K each, less attorney's fees. Not out of line at all. And I am sensitive to outrageous damages awards.
7 posted on
12/20/2005 4:57:27 AM PST by
Humble Servant
(Keep it simple - do what's right.)
To: DB
I don't like the settlement, either. I hope it gets reduced on appeal, but I think there was clear cut discrimination.
8 posted on
12/20/2005 5:10:26 AM PST by
sportutegrl
(People who say, "All I know is . . ." really mean, "All I want you to focus on is . . .")
To: DB
Part of the award was for punitive damages. These sorts of awards help insure incidents like this don't happen again. The cost is simply to high for the offending party.
To: DB
"Okay, they may have been wronged, but how to the tune of $3,000,000 were they damaged???"
They should have received $5,000,000 and part of the money should come out of the salaries of John Street and the rest of his cronies in the city government. These 4 white workers will never be able to work in a safe environment as long as they are in Philadelphia. This should serve as a lesson to the race hustlers who run that town.
16 posted on
12/20/2005 5:41:37 AM PST by
wmileo
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson