The $75 million lawsuit was only against Valor, but the jury found that the uncle and the school were also responsible. They awarded $24 million to Grunow, $1.2 million (5%) from Valor, $10.8 million (45%) from the school board, and $12 million (50%) from the uncle, McCray.
A couple of questions come to mind. Why didn't the jury find the pawn shop liable? Why didn't Grunow include the school in her suit? If McCray settled out of court, how can he be held liable again?
According to the CNN (11-15-02) article:
"McCray and the school board were not defendants in the suit."
"Grunow's attorney, Robert Montgomery, ... said he would go back to court to ask the judge to hold Valor responsible for the entire damages."
I'm guessing, but I think that, since McCray and the school board weren't named in the suit, they're not liable. The attorney screwed up, so then he asked for the whole $24 million from Valor.
Now that the suit against Valor is thrown out, the widow is left with $575,000 less attorneys fees.
Who knows. Why did they even find Valor liable when no evidence of negligence was presented?
Why didn't Grunow include the school in her suit?
Probably because the school had settled the claim against it. I guess there were three separate suits.
If McCray settled out of court, how can he be held liable again?
He can't. I try to not interchange the words, but there is a difference in civil court between one being found "liable" and one being found "responsible". The jury can attach a % of reposnsibility to a third person not party to the suit(they could have found Brazill 100% responsible), but only a party to the suit is actually liable. Its really confusing.
Now that the suit against Valor is thrown out, the widow is left with $575,000 less attorneys fees.
Yep, that looks about right.