Owner of car dealership labeled "Taliban Toyota" wins millions

[vienna]

http://news.yahoo.com/owner-car-dealership-labeled-taliban-toyota-wins-millions-004302989.html

[soopaman2]

He needs the settlement, he isn't getting much bussiness with that name, in that location.:yawn:

[Jimbuna]

"The feeling I received in the courtroom for the truth to come out was worth a lot more than any money anybody can give me," Esfahani told Reuters on Tuesday.


So he'll be giving the money back or at least donating it to a charitable cause then?

[Gerald]

And here I thought it was the Ford Focus owners, :hmmm:

[Jimbuna]

http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/8586/smacka1.gif

[Gerald]

^:haha:

[CaptainMattJ.]

The fact that someone can sue you for millions of dollars for slander proves how ridiculous the system has become.

so much for free press and speech. The people who would label them as such are selfish, ignorant, idiotic people anyway, and therefore few if any will listen to their slurrs. So why does he get millions of dollars for being the recipient of weak trash talking that really wouldnt kill business anyway?

[Tribesman]

so much for free press and speech
Too right, people should be free to tell others that someone is a terrorist and is responsible for the deaths of Ameican soldiers, that is what freedom of speech means.
And its even better when you can accuse someone of being of being a threat to national security because you want the commision on a sale.

[mookiemookie]

The fact that someone can sue you for millions of dollars for slander proves how ridiculous the system has become.

So if the award was capped at something reasonable to you, let's say, $100,000...I could go ahead and slander Eastern Shore Toyota, so long as the damage I did to them was greater than $100,000 in lost sales.

Are you starting to see the problem with that?

Punitive damages are the only kind of damages that businesses understand. I'll bet you that the idiots who slandered the honest businessman won't do it again.

[Platapus]

Sounds like a good court decision.

I am assuming that Bob Tyler Toyota will be looking for a new salesman or perhaps even a new GM. I don't think Toyota of North America appreciates this type of publicity.


A Bob Tyler salesman was accused of telling the same couple that Esfahani was from Iraq and calling him a "terrorist" who put soldiers including the salesman's brother in harm's way.
"(Esfahani) is funneling money back to his family and other terrorists. I have a brother over there and what you're doing is helping kill my brother," the salesman told the couple when he called them on the Eastern Shore sales floor, according to the suit.


That's pretty low even for a car salesman (which is not exactly a high bar)


Captainmattj, I presume that determining whether there was lost business was one of the factors that the court was determining.

[CaptainMattJ.]

Too right, people should be free to tell others that someone is a terrorist and is responsible for the deaths of Ameican soldiers, that is what freedom of speech means.
And its even better when you can accuse someone of being of being a threat to national security because you want the commision on a sale.
Well, hes an idiotic and utterly ignorant worthless human being. But that doesnt mean he doesnt get to say what he wants to within reason (business slander is still a crime). If you dont like what he says, ignore him. Even tell him off. Thats probably worse for himself and his shabby business anyway, to make such outrageous claims. But i think that being allowed to sue people for millions of dollars for uneducated out of line messages is beyond the pale. Not that he doesnt deserve it, but the amount of sales lost due to his slander is immeasurably disproportionate to what Esfahani received.

He did deserve his fate. I just think the fact that it can be a reality to sue for millions is a bit out of proportion. And a bit greedy. He made outrageous slander against a business and Esfahani has used the law to sue for punitive damages. I think, however, that the amount rewarded was a bit much.

[Tribesman]

Well, hes an idiotic and utterly ignorant worthless human being. But that doesnt mean he doesnt get to say what he wants to.
So you would have no problem with people going round your neighbouhood telling everyone you are a child molester then, after all its freedom of speech and they would be idiots but hey there is nothing wrong with it is there as people must be allowed to say what they want to.:hmmm:

[kiwi_2005]

Taliban Toyota :rotfl2:

[CaptainMattJ.]

So you would have no problem with people going round your neighbouhood telling everyone you are a child molester then, after all its freedom of speech and they would be idiots but hey there is nothing wrong with it is there as people must be allowed to say what they want to.:hmmm:
The KKK have been around for a century, and cant be arrested for anything involving their slanders. i have a very big problem with them, but i recognize that they are using their right of free speech. And id have a problem with that situation too. But we're talking about the law here. His claims were out of hand and illegal business slander. However i thought the amount rewarded was Quite high and a little over the top all things considering in the eyes of the law.

Different people in different social standings slander each other all the time. And i have a problem with all of it. But i dont think that such high rewards should be given to those who are on the receiving end.

[Buddahaid]

The KKK have been around for a century, and cant be arrested for anything involving their slanders. i have a very big problem with them, but i recognize that they are using their right of free speech. And id have a problem with that situation too. But we're talking about the law here. His claims were out of hand and illegal business slander. However i thought the amount rewarded was Quite high and a little over the top all things considering in the eyes of the law.

Different people in different social standings slander each other all the time. And i have a problem with all of it. But i dont think that such high rewards should be given to those who are on the receiving end.

Just what business competitors are the KKK slandering? The damages are just and I don't think the slanderers are even a bit sorry about it. They most likely think they've been wronged instead.

[mookiemookie]

But i dont think that such high rewards should be given to those who are on the receiving end.

But what did the slander cost the recipient in business lost? And what ensures that the offender doesn't do it again?

[CaptainMattJ.]

But what did the slander cost the recipient in business lost? And what ensures that the offender doesn't do it again?
The fact that he can and will get sued again for the same thing means he probably wont do it again. And the compensatory damages were 2.5 million, while he gets double that in punitive damages, totaling 7.5 million dollars.

And tribesman was commenting about something not exactly relating to business slander, about freedom of speech instead, which is why i replied with something that didnt exactly relate to business slander. I thought the damages were a bit over the top considering that this can happen to any business suing another, with the same if not more payouts in punitive damages with essentially the same kind of slander, getting paid large punitive damages that disproportionately overshadow the actually damages. The only problem i had is with this fact, not this case.

[Buddahaid]

How do you measure the actual damages? I'm guessing the slander will live on in peoples minds just like a lawyer will say something he knows will be objected to but will still plant the seed in the jurors minds.

[mookiemookie]

getting paid large punitive damages that disproportionately overshadow the actually damages.

Well that's exactly the point of punitive damages. Punitive damages are not awarded in proportion to the actual injuries suffered in the case. They're awarded as an example to others who would engage in a similar activity as a deterrent to the egregious activity that brought about the original lawsuit.

[Platapus]

In my opinion punitive awards, which are a form of fine/punishment should not go to the person doing the suing but go to the state.

The purpose of a lawsuit is to repair the damages and try to make things as they were. Punitive judgments are intended to punish the offender and hence tend to be larger amounts. I see no reason why a person suing should collect monies above and beyond the damages.

It is for a cut of the much larger punitive judgments that motivates lawyers to push for suits. If the punitive judgment is treated like a fine (which it is) and goes to the states, the lawyer won't be able to add that to his cut.

That will bring down the number of lawsuits in my opinion.

[mookiemookie]

In my opinion punitive awards, which are a form of fine/punishment should not go to the person doing the suing but go to the state.

The purpose of a lawsuit is to repair the damages and try to make things as they were. Punitive judgments are intended to punish the offender and hence tend to be larger amounts. I see no reason why a person suing should collect monies above and beyond the damages.

It is for a cut of the much larger punitive judgments that motivates lawyers to push for suits. If the punitive judgment is treated like a fine (which it is) and goes to the states, the lawyer won't be able to add that to his cut.

That will bring down the number of lawsuits in my opinion.

Not a bad idea at all, in my opinion. It doesn't unfairly enrich someone who doesn't deserve it, yet still accomplishes the goal of discouraging the unwanted behavior.

[1480]

As a defendant in a lawsuit, never fun when you are at the deposition and they ask you for your financials. :nope: (We won btw) :D

Tort law reform is needed. The proceedings are mind boggling, you then understand the phrase 'kangaroo court.'

What is even better, the plaintiff can ask for either compensatory damages to be awarded or compensatory and punitive damages. Understandable and makes a lot of sense BUT if the plaintiff only asks for compensatory only, the jury could also award punitive damages as well. :timeout:

And it must be a full moon, I am agreeing with Platapus and mookie all in the same thread!

[Tribesman]

And tribesman was commenting about something not exactly relating to business slander, about freedom of speech instead, which is why i replied with something that didnt exactly relate to business slander.
I commented about something directly comparable, falsely saying someone is a nonce and falsely saying someone is a terrorist both fall in to the category where the false allegations are of such a nature that they do not need to be proven to have caused damage as their severity and the possible implications arising from such false allegations stand by themselves.

The KKK have been around for a century, and cant be arrested for anything involving their slanders.
Of course they can, what you can and cannot say about another is always tricky, which is why the best way to slag someone off or attack their reputation is to stick to facts(or choose the words very carefully with a good lawyer beforehand)