Quantifying feelings in terms of monetary settlements is tough. I personally believe that feelings are best meant to be settled in criminal court. You obviously can't say how much somebody would have made or not made. You have to look at averages like they do for improper incarceration. Obviously some people will benefit from that and some will lose. Somebody like Floyd is likely to benefit. Honestly, most people killed by police officers are. It's generally not rich people getting murdered by them. If Jeff Bezos/Bill Gates/Elon Musk/etc are murdered by a police officer they're not going to get a fair amount. No state can afford $10 billion from their annual budget to his estate for 20 years.
Here's an interesting scenario. Imagine it wasn't MN police that killed Floyd. It was Walmart security alleging he stole an item, asking him for his receipt. If Walmart security had their knee on him for 9 minutes, waiting for the police to arrive, I wonder what the settlement would be. $27 million? Walmart might fight that type of settlement to lower it. Walmart might not, given their size, and because of PR. However, lots of companies would definitely fight that amount.
I thought this thread was about Michele's nude body and her shaven beaver under her bathrob... You guys still talking about the Black dude ? wrbtrader
This was the most obvious case in my lifetime: https://www.industryweek.com/archiv...strikes-down-290-million-verdict-against-ford They tried to go after Ford with $290M in punitive damages.
You said, lots of companies would definitely not settle (they don't have to 'fight' a settlement offer) for what Minn. settled for. I asked for your source. You supplied an article about SCOTUS returning a case to a lower court for reconsideration? Because $290 million might be too high? But the Floyd settlement was a mere $27 million? Anyway, let me say this: MN AGREED to the Floyd settlement. Every situation is different. What Ford is willing to settle for in a car crash case, doesn't have to correlate to what they'd settle for if their security guard did what happened to Floyd. IOW, you can't cite a source that tells you that lots of companies would not have taken that $27 million dollar settlement. Finally, consider this: Walmart settled for $65 million over some chairs. http://www.ubf.consulting/walmart-settles-suitable-seating-paga-claim-for-65-million/ And a basic google search would reveal that they regularly settle discrimination cases for $20 million. Floyd wasn't a discrimination case; he was killed, slowly. And we can't even talk about the non-disclosed settlements. Any idea why they wouldn't want it disclosed? Rhetorical question.
MN took it, because of politics. Would every state? I'm not sure. The blue ones probably would. When companies settle lawsuits it's about the bottom line. How much of a PR hit there will be continuing is a major factor. However, what you're asking for obviously doesn't exist. You want me to find a company's position on the George Floyd's settlement? That doesn't mean I can't claim they wouldn't. As many do in politics, I'm using inference to make a prediction to a hypothetical scenario. I feel pretty strongly that my prediction would be right, but I've been wrong before. $27 million is a lot of money to a lot of companies even with a potential PR hit.
When you say 'lots of companies definitely would not settle,' you'll likely get challenged. But if you say, 'I doubt most companies would settle,' ... not so much.
I'm pretty confident about this, but if you want me to be semantically correct as if I'm writing a dissertation, sure. I don't proofread everything I write and I'm not immune to all logical/semantical errors. There's always room to re-think something, especially when dealing with incomplete information.