All you lawyers saying $75mil was too high....

[missouridawg]

Serious question. Who on this board would not let someone post a grainy (so I've read) video of them naked to walk away with 10-12 million? I would think most would say sign me up.

Who here would allow a guy, creepy enough to stalk you for a year, film you naked in a random city without your consent?

That's the question you should ask.

[confucius say]

Who here would allow a guy, creepy enough to stalk you for a year, film you naked in a random city without your consent?

That's the question you should ask.

Of course the answer to that is no. But that question has nothing to do with the underlying premise present throughout this thread, which was $ and whether the verdict was too high. Your question totally eliminated money.

[dawgs]

Serious question. Who on this board would not let someone post a grainy (so I've read) video of them naked to walk away with 10-12 million? I would think most would say sign me up.

If you consent to it, you aren't being violated.

[Coach34]

Who here would allow a guy, creepy enough to stalk you for a year, film you naked in a random city without your consent?

That's the question you should ask.

for 10-12 million? Film away

[dawgs]

There's literally no way to objectively say you'd be ok to wake up tomorrow and there be an email in all your friends, families, co-workers, etc. inbox with a video of you hanging out naked in a hotel room where you expected privacy. You'd be creeped the **** out and feel violated. Now imagine being a somewhat famous attractive female that probably gets contacted on social media by creepers hourly and likely doesn't cover a sporting event without some cool guy yelling about how hot she is or how much he wants to screw her or something creepy, then waking up to find that video is the biggest thing on the Internet and millions of people are watching. That's absolutely humiliating and embarrassing.

[War Machine Dawg]

Is your problem with it really over seeking $75M instead of $55M? Because that just seems like splitting hairs and missing the forest for the trees imo.

And who wouldn't rather ask for too much and get some of that instead of asking for too little?

It's pretty easy to figure out C34 has serious issues when it comes to women. He needs to STFU and stick to sports and trolling Northern Miss.

[Dawg61]

There's literally no way to objectively say you'd be ok to wake up tomorrow and there be an email in all your friends, families, co-workers, etc. inbox with a video of you hanging out naked in a hotel room where you expected privacy. You'd be creeped the **** out and feel violated. Now imagine being a somewhat famous attractive female that probably gets contacted on social media by creepers hourly and likely doesn't cover a sporting event without some cool guy yelling about how hot she is or how much he wants to screw her or something creepy, then waking up to find that video is the biggest thing on the Internet and millions of people are watching. That's absolutely humiliating and embarrassing.

For $55 million I'd introduce myself by showing the video to everyone I ever meet for the rest of my life

[Coach34]

It's pretty easy to figure out C34 has serious issues when it comes to women. He needs to STFU and stick to sports and trolling Northern Miss.

oh hold on- I want to hear this. Serious issues how? I don't view women as the weaker, must be protected sex. They have more power than men will ever have.

Make me sure you respond to my issues

[Dawgology]

This thread is absolutely useless without pics...

[Jack Lambert]

Too much for some pictures of Boobies.

[Johnson85]

Once someone starts digging in heels, they'll find whatever idiotic reason to keep backing their ignorant claims. We've seen two do it in this thread alone.

You're arguing taht the fact that she only got $55M is evidence that $75M wasn't too much to get. And other people are the ones digging their heels in to back their ignorant claims...

[Johnson85]

So who ACTUALLY will pay? My guess is Marriot is insured for this. So that means that those who pay for liability insurance will pay for it. THAT will be passed on to their customers as a cost of doing business. That means when you get right down to it that WE pay for it. Cheers.

I seriously doubt the franchisee is insured for $26M. I don't know what the standard practice is with hotels, but I'm guessing it's more like $10M.

Doesn't matter though. They're going to settle within insurance limits or slightly above or the verdict is likely going to get reduced on a remittitur motion or on appeal. Economic damages are likely minimal to non-existent, so without punitive damages (which as far as I know nothing has been reported about teh hotel doing anything to merit punitive damages), I don't think the judge or an appellate court is going to be able to justify anywhere close to $50M in emotional distress.

[Johnson85]

That's not a deterrent to the hotel to overhaul their system so that other stalkers can't figure out which rooms people are in by calling and asking to be connected through.

I'll never understand why people with attitudes like this aren't in business for themselves. You think hotel franchisees roll in enough money that they won't take corrective actions to prevent even a $1M loss? That's just 17ing insane. If you think a group franchising hotels can ignore a multimillion dollar loss, why in the 17 would you not be a hotel franchisee? I mean for 17s sake, all you have to do is raise a few million in capital, get a loan, and then you'll rake in so much money that you won't even bother to adjust your security policies when you suffer a $2M loss (plus attorneys fees) because it will be so minimal compared to your profits. If you believe this, why aren't you out knocking on doors trying to raise money to open a 17ing hotel?

But in the real world, not only are hotel franchises not insanely profitable, their insurance carrier is likely going to require their security measures to be fixed, or they are going to increase their premiums to where it doesn't make sense not to fix it.

[Johnson85]

Do you know if she had psychological medical bills after the incident? And of so, how much they were?

Also, just to clarify you are advocating for a system with literally no punitive damages?

What do you think the franchise group did to merit punitive damages?

[missouridawg]

You're arguing taht the fact that she only got $55M is evidence that $75M wasn't too much to get. And other people are the ones digging their heels in to back their ignorant claims...

You always, always, always ask for more than what you think you can get. The fact the jury only dropped it by about 20% indicates that she could've asked for $100mil and received more than $55mil in return.

[missouridawg]

What do you think the franchise group did to merit punitive damages?

They allowed for a hotel to be run in a matter that divulged information about their clients that was used to do something illegal and heinous.

[Ralph]

They allowed for a hotel to be run in a matter that divulged information about their clients that was used to do something illegal and heinous.

While this is true, punitive damages are typically gauged by how egregious the intent of the wrongdoing. In this case, I haven't seen anything that lends to believe the hotel employees were involved in a conspiracy to assist in the heinous act.

Certainly poor policy and/or training employees, but the intent of the hotel was not egregious imo.

[dawgs]

I'll never understand why people with attitudes like this aren't in business for themselves. You think hotel franchisees roll in enough money that they won't take corrective actions to prevent even a $1M loss? That's just 17ing insane. If you think a group franchising hotels can ignore a multimillion dollar loss, why in the 17 would you not be a hotel franchisee? I mean for 17s sake, all you have to do is raise a few million in capital, get a loan, and then you'll rake in so much money that you won't even bother to adjust your security policies when you suffer a $2M loss (plus attorneys fees) because it will be so minimal compared to your profits. If you believe this, why aren't you out knocking on doors trying to raise money to open a 17ing hotel?

But in the real world, not only are hotel franchises not insanely profitable, their insurance carrier is likely going to require their security measures to be fixed, or they are going to increase their premiums to where it doesn't make sense not to fix it.

The insurance companies will pressure them to correct the issues, because the insurance companies just paid out millions for them.

That said, auto makers regularly do cost-benefit analysis on parts recalls. The estimate how much they'll pay out in lawsuits/attorney's fees for the part failing, and they'll compare that to the cost of replacing the part. If they don't expect many lawsuits or big payouts to cost more than the recall replacement, they don't issue a recall. In this case, of the hotel only owed $2M in damages, maybe the estimate this is a once in a lifetime occurrence and it's not worth spending the money on a new phone system, more security, etc. but $26M gets their attention and if it happens again for the same reasons and they don't take any new measures to prevent it from happening, they'd owe a lot more the next time around. Suddenly now the updated system and new security costs less than the estimated cost of a future incident.

[maroonmania]

I think the whole thing is ridiculous and she should have been awarded a couple million and thats it. She has profited from the video- whether she wanted to or not. Anything over $2MM is ridiculous

I can see both sides. That amount of money for a grainy video that hasn't harmed her career is a little over the top BUT the hotel needs to understand how serious this was. With this particular case it was a sports personality's privacy and dignity that was violated but what if the guy had been out to do her real physical harm? I mean apparently the guy got access to the room somehow. What if his intentions had been to rape or even kill her? No doubt, the hotel security thing is a VERY serious matter.

[THE Bruce Dickinson]

This is the point. Thank You