We had an IT director once run a mass delete script against all our internal servers the day he was fired. The servers had data for the state on it and it ended up costing like 1.5 million to recover. I don’t know all the details but from what I understand he was personally sued by the state and not our company.
1 Like
If the state was the party effected by it - it makes sense that the state would sue and not the individual company.
I find it weird that the lawsuit alleges several illegal things - but it’s not targeting any specific individual for legal action
1 Like
It’s exactly how it works, to say otherwise shows ignorance of the court systems.
2 Likes
The state doesnt file frivolous lawsuits because they sunk too much time and resources into a case. I cant believe I have to explain this crap to adults.
It’s idiotic because it wouldnt even be a good plan. How do they plan on winning if they think they have no case? Unless you think they’re gonna manufacture evidence (which would cost more money and likely lead to them getting caught and disbarred) then this is just absurd.
7 Likes
The hell it doesn’t lmao, you hold to much in the courts good faith.
5 Likes
Its not about good faith. Why not quote the whole thing so people can see the parts you’re ignoring? I’ll repeat myself for you:
It’s idiotic because it wouldnt even be a good plan. How do they plan on winning if they think they have no case? Unless you think they’re gonna manufacture evidence (which would cost more money and likely lead to them getting caught and disbarred) then this is just absurd.
4 Likes
I don’t know about that department exactly but a LOT of the departments like that are mostly funded by the lawsuits/charges they bring forth and members of that specific investigation get a kickback when its successful. At least my friends wife who works for the Irs does
1 Like
Good end point champ
I was copy pasting what I said before. Now address the damned issue or stop being a snarky child:
It’s idiotic because it wouldnt even be a good plan. How do they plan on winning if they think they have no case? Unless you think they’re gonna manufacture evidence (which would cost more money and likely lead to them getting caught and disbarred) then this is just absurd.
3 Likes
And doing a poor job of it.
Its not about faith. Its about the fact that this isnt a plan that would work without costing more money and people’s reputations.
so your argument is that in order to save money and time, the state is going to spend more of it by pursuing a case they have no evidence for, possibly manufacturing evidence to do so.
How can anyone be this stupid?
9 Likes
They don’t need to win a court case. They use the court of public opinion to drive sales down to the point where it’s cheaper for the company to settle than to face more bad press.
Are people really this naive about how the world ACTUALLY works?
4 Likes
A lack of good public schools, parents who simply didn’t care to educate and discipline their kids, sometimes just individual natural stupidity…
4 Likes
No, I wasn’t joking. The most common use of the acronym is the Federal Aviation Admin.
Btw, I wasn’t being obtuse. Before I asked I Googled “faa” to see if it had other uses. The entire first page was about the gov. agency. Then I Googled “most common use of the acronym faa” and again it came up with the gov. agency.
2 Likes
Just out of curiosity, but what kind of lawyer are you?
A podiatrist and an ENT are both doctors, but I’m not going to see someone who looks at feet all day if I have a sore throat.
1 Like
Not as much as abandoning a 2 year investigation.
They are shooting for a Hail Mary to carry them miraculously to a pay out.
No, to make money.
To force a settlement by swaying public opinion.
They want money. They can have absolutely no case, and still get money via this method, which is extremely common among lawsuits with large businesses.
Again, you have no idea how any of this works, or plays out.
Enough with your naive childish view of the court system, because it’s not some clean black and white scenario. But I guess your schools failed you huh?
3 Likes
i mean you arent really contributing to the conversation
4 Likes
they drop 2 year+ investigations ALL the time. if it were a nothing burger they would of dropped it.
2 Likes
Not if they can force a settlement. Which is their end goal because they have no case.
They will simply try and aim for public opinion, force a settlement.
2 Likes
And they’re doing all of this because…?
California isnt exactly short on money. They’re the 5th largest economy in the world. You think this is some scheme for them to make some chump change? At the risk of them all being disbarred for pushing a frivolous lawsuit?
For God’s sake touch grass, man. You are so out of touch with reality no wonder you and Rev think these things.