Do you agree with the trial outcome?

Hey Android_movie,

Damages for lost wages must be based on a calculation of expected lost wages over some period of time. In Andrew's case, he was expected to die soon, and that would limit the total of his lost wages because of the short time factor. Andrew cannot expect to be paid for wages twenty years into the future since he had no expectation he would be able to practice as an attorney due to his impending death. There was another smaller award made, but I forget the reason for that award. The big award was made for punitive damages and was nearly five million dollars. Punitive damages can be anything a jury thinks is warranted, and in this case, the jury obviously considered the law firm deliberately lied about Andrew (which is also perjury) and deserved to be punished with the idea of discouraging such behavior in the future.

Of course such jury verdicts are frequently appealed, and a reduced settlement is reached before the appeals process is concluded. In any case, the law firm did lose the case, and it certainly was a win for Andrew.

Do I agree with it? Sure do. I do not mind the idea that a business should be able to exclude people they do not think fit in with what they want their business to be. However, I absolutely hate the idea that an employer is able to abuse their power by fabricating a completely phony situation that will ruin a person's life. That, to me, is what punitive damages is all about.

Best wishes,
Dave Wile

Apparently the point of that scene was lost on you