SakanaToDoubutsu t1_jd5xv47 wrote
So hypothetical question, let's say an officer shoots someone and assume they are 100% in the right, if the family brings a wrongful death lawsuit against the city what would it cost to litigate that case to completion?
I say this because settling out of court is super common simply because the cost of litigation is often way more expensive than the actual amount of relief the plaintiff is looking for. To use the case of the 300 in the Bronx, trying hundreds of civil rights cases would cost the city hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars per case, so it's way cheaper just to pay everyone out $21,500 and move on.
creativepositioning t1_jd67ae6 wrote
The city has its own law department. They get paid a salary, regardless of whether or not the city settles.
Crimsonwolf1445 t1_jd7zclk wrote
The city also pays all the court costs for a trial
creativepositioning t1_jd8eurw wrote
Lol how much do you think those are? They are defendants, they aren't paying filing fees.
Crimsonwolf1445 t1_jd8gi5k wrote
They are also the entire legal system.
The city pays for the whole courtroom and trial.
creativepositioning t1_jd8q7eq wrote
The judges are salaried, the staff are salaried, they show up every day regardless of whether its a criminal or civil trial. I'm aware the system costs money. However, you are making an unfounded assumption that actually litigating some cases would result in any meaningful differences in expenditures by the city, when it's likely NOT the case.
Crimsonwolf1445 t1_jd9kp96 wrote
It would literally create more trials and court sessions it would absolutely cost more in tax dollars
creativepositioning t1_jd9wvle wrote
How many do you think people are asking the city to litigate here? it was clearly quite a few, no need to be this obtuse.
Crimsonwolf1445 t1_jda07wq wrote
No reason to litigate if you cit them a check. Thats how the city has handled the issue.
They have staff run the numbers and have come to the conclusion that litigation costs would be more than settlements and therefore they just settle.
How many WANT to pursue a trial? Or how many sue in general?
Either way i dont have numbers but i imagine its absurdly high.
Anecdotally ive seen lawsuits for outright lies get the person a few grand with little push back from the city even with mountains of video evidence.
creativepositioning t1_jda3tm4 wrote
Those cases probably just involve facts that the police don't want to come out through discovery - like a video showing the accuser is a liar while simultaneously being a record of incredibly poor behavior on the part of the officer. Otherwise I don't buy the settlements.
I was referring to the people here saying the city should litigate the worst of these cases, as if that'd be cheaper than settling them. In that sense, we probably don't disagree. My point was more that, if the city had to litigate a particularly high profile/risk case, it'd probably not be significantly more expensive for the city as compared to a normal party in a litigation.
Crimsonwolf1445 t1_jda4kn9 wrote
No video outright proving innocence and that the accuser was lying.
It was sinply cheaper to pay a few thousand dollars to the person that fight the lawsuit.
There was no financial benefit to winning. They gain nothing
It actually makes perfect sense when looking at things from a number crunching standpoint.
Once you realize the city gains absolutely nothing by crushing people in court for these lawsuits the strategy of just settling out of court makes perfect sense.
Most of the people that make these false claims and sue are penniless so its not like you can countersue.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments