News Forum - Banks deny wrongdoing in Jeffrey Epstein lawsuit

[Thaiger]

Major banks are denying any legal responsibilities for Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking after two victims filed lawsuits against them. American bank JPMorgan Chase and German-based Deutsche Bank have requested that federal courts drop the suit that they say claims without merit that the banks should have known of Epstein’s illegal sexual escapades and therefore bear some responsibility for the abuse that occurred. Jeffrey Epstein was a financier worth an estimated US$600 million when he died of an alleged suicide under suspicious circumstances in jail awaiting charges. The two women who filed the suit under the anonymous pseudonym Jane Doe allege […]

The story Banks deny wrongdoing in Jeffrey Epstein lawsuit as seen on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

[palooka]

Pissing in the wind.

 

[Haole.TH]

The Attorney General of US Virgin Islands was just fired - effective Dec 31, 2022 - by the Governor there.
She had just filed suit against 'JP Morgan Chase' a few days prior without notifying the Governor first.

 

[Grumpish]

Unfortunately, unless the case is thrown out by the judge the banks will probably settle out of court regardless of liability or guilt. The US system of allowing juries to set compensation has led to some pretty insane awards - the initial multi-million dollar award against McDonalds for not warning that hot coffee was hot, and the multi-billion award against Johnson & Johnson over talcum powder made on the basis of no scientific evidence at all, are two that spring to mind.  

[Soidog]

25 minutes ago, Grumpish said:

Unfortunately, unless the case is thrown out by the judge the banks will probably settle out of court regardless of liability or guilt. The US system of allowing juries to set compensation has led to some pretty insane awards - the initial multi-million dollar award against McDonalds for not warning that hot coffee was hot, and the multi-billion award against Johnson & Johnson over talcum powder made on the basis of no scientific evidence at all, are two that spring to mind.  

I wouldn’t mind if the US (Often the California culture) nonsense remained in the US. But they essentially export all of this crap around the world. Mostly perpetrated by the social media platforms in the US.

A few months ago I went out for dinner with a group of Thai friends. While at the house of one family, their 18 year old daughter came downstairs and the father commented that she needed to eat more as was looking too skinny. He was concerned for her well-being. She replied “that’s body shaming”. My heart sank! 

[JohninDublin]

1 hour ago, Grumpish said:

Unfortunately, unless the case is thrown out by the judge the banks will probably settle out of court regardless of liability or guilt. The US system of allowing juries to set compensation has led to some pretty insane awards - the initial multi-million dollar award against McDonalds for not warning that hot coffee was hot, and the multi-billion award against Johnson & Johnson over talcum powder made on the basis of no scientific evidence at all, are two that spring to mind.  

The MacD's (Liebeck-v-MacDonalds) case is possibly one of the most mis-reported an abused cases ever to hit the news.

The case was about a woman aged 79 who got 3rd degree burns to her thighs when she struggled to open the cup. As you might imagine, like many women of that age, she was quite scrawny with little flesh on her thighs, and so the scald was relatively serious, required several days in hospital as well as skin grafts and she was in pain for the rest of her life.

She was initially awarded $160k in compensatory damages to cover her medcal expenses pain and suffering covering two years of medical treatment. That might give you an idea of how serious the injuries were. Her Lawyers asked for $20k to settle the matter out of court, but McD's refused this. She was awarded a further $2.7 Mill in punitive damages. For those who don't understand that concept, it is a discretionary award made by judges and juries in order to punish peristent offenders so that defendants focus on fixing the problem. McD's had been sued for this on numerous occasions and done nothing to fix the problem. Their coffee was about 20 degrees hotter than most of the competition, so the fix was not rocket science.

The judge reduced the amount to $650k. McDs appealed this, and the case was eventually settled for an undisclosed amount.

However, the mis-reporting of this case was to have far-reaching and very serious consequences. The Insurance Lobby started lobbying state legislatures to place a cap on these claims, using it as "the poster child" for what was wrong with damages claims, but not revealing the real details of the case. They managed to persuade several states to cap ALL claims at $200k, and others to hold referenda They sent ut the message that "this was the reason your premium is so high" and suggested that these claims were scams.

In several states, the voters agreed to set the cap at $200k. That's when the problems really started. Prior to that, a child might become paraplegic or even quadraplegic due to some drunk in car hitting them. In the past, Insurers were inclined to fight these claims, because life-long care might cost millons of dollars. Now, they were only to willing pay them because the legal bills to the insurers were likey to exceed $200k. This then led to parents and others affected by this saying things like, "I know I voted for this, but I meant it to apply to the scammers. I never wanted it to be applied to genuine cases like mine".

Clearly, you have not understood that case. It was not that they failed to warn the victim that the coffee was hot. It was because the coffee was excessively hot. McD's coffee was sold at 180-190F. Had McD's settled for the original $20k claim, we would never have heard of this case.