11-08-2007, 11:02 PM
Quote:2) Regarding compensatory damages... the problem is how do you place a value on something that is a 1 time only event? If paying for the funeral was the only remedy... that's cheap for causing people grief. The same thing applies for paying for psychiatric services. I am not saying that it's easy to come up with a figure for this... but am saying that there is more to the "event" than just the cost of the event.
3) Concerning punitive damages... Punitives exist to punish individuals/entities when criminal laws don't apply (Except Exxon, where they are pushing to get punitives removed entirely for the Valdez:P). Plus, they theoretically represent a means to reduce the likelihood of the event happening again. Ideally, the punitive damage amount is calculated to serve as a deterrent to future conduct.
Interesting note about Juries and 'damages'--Historically in product liability / person injury civil suits, Juries have been far more generous with damage awards for suffering than for actual damage. I.e., causing a person to die has historically lower damages than causing that same person to suffer.
Also, regarding the so-called 1st Amendment aspects of the story: The ACLU has challenged two recent (WBC-inspired) laws written banning protests near funerals, but they have not become involved with this lawsuit. Probably because (counter to the WBC's opinion on the matter) this has nothing to do with the 1st Amendment:
Quote:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
A jury of your peers deciding against you in a civil suit is not a law-making body. Whoops!