EF! Fined $1million in Idaho
dbraun at u.washington.edu
Sun Nov 10 17:58:39 EST 1996
On Sun, 10 Nov 1996, J Zeigler wrote:
> D. Braun wrote:
> > describe how punitive
> > damages that are 5000% of property damage is reasonable. Do you believe
> > that either this figure will be upheld on appeal, or should be? Really.
> I would expect that it will be upheld, simply because it was awarded by
> a jury and the courts power is actually limited, although they hate to
> admit it. Should it be, yes, the Jury is the only one that was in a
> position to hear all the facts and view all the witnesses. Something
> obviously raised the hair on the back of the necks of this jury.
> John R. Zeigler
OK, by your reasoning, Exxon's fine should have been a tad larger. Maybe
someone can do the exact math, but 50 times the clean-up costs of about 1
billion is 50,000,000,000. That dosen't include the impacts to fisheries
in the spill year, the failed herring roe fishery, or the fact that the
cleanup did not entirely succeed. So, let's add another billion to the
original damages--- now we have punative damages of 100,000,000,000. You
just agreed, in principle, that we should support Exxon's bankruptcy.
> Unsolicited commercial email will be proof-read with
> the help of the mailer, his postmaster, and if necessary,
> his upstream provider(s).
More information about the Ag-forst