Quote:
|
Pretty much every Complaint I've ever read and many that I've written -- that's the nature of the beast. You throw everything into a Complaint, and that's all that is being talked about -- the ability to file a case. If the evidence is too circumstantial that the Plaintiff can't prove his or her case, then there's a dismissal or finding for the Defendant.
|
Quote:
Again, this is the same goal of every class-action. No one wants to actually go to trial, lawyers working on contingency lose money if they go to trial.
I just don't see the big deal here, none of this seems new. Maybe I'm missing something?
|
Makes one wonder why the WSJ would waste their time putting this issue in an editorial if it's business as usual and nothing new. I'm thinking the fact that the lawsuit which does not specifically identify individuals as being discriminated against, but that discrimination can be proven just by looking at the company's roster of employees is the threshold difference. That and the the 9th court of appeals allowing these employees to file a class action suit based solely upon
"statistical imbalances in pay and promotions," has put a scare into shareholders and opened the floodgates for similar lawsuits.
Also, I think it is important to note that during the last year 14 of 16 Ninth Circuit cases were reversed by the High Court. Maybe it's my lack of legal knowledge, but it appears the ninth court is using a different criteria then the Supreme Court when they are reviewing these cases. It gives one the impression that the 9th Court of Appeals is wasting money and time.