| |
| ▲ | giantg2 an hour ago | parent [-] | | Yes, civil suits are also legal battles. There's no reason it should have taken more than a year to resolve. By the way, I dont know who you are quoting as that is not my exact wording. | | |
| ▲ | tptacek an hour ago | parent [-] | | I think this is the kind of thing that sounds reasonable until the first time you've sued someone. Resolution in one year? Don't even fantasize about it. | | |
| ▲ | defrost an hour ago | parent [-] | | "We" (here in W.Australia) got sued by a US company for doing math once - took six years of legal back and forth to "win", eight years out of people's lives from disruption, and essentially destroyed a company that innovated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LizardTech,_Inc._v._Earth_Reso.... | | |
| ▲ | tptacek an hour ago | parent [-] | | I don't think these are crazy timelines for civil litigation here. I mean, is it worth criticizing? I guess, sure. But: civil suits take for-ev-er. A case is an indeterminate but fairly large number of steps, each of which includes 1d8+4 month next check-in date. | | |
| ▲ | ryandrake 32 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I'd like to see an hour-by-hour breakdown of what labor is actually being done, by which judges, lawyers and clerks, during the course of a 6 year trial, and see how much it adds up to. I wonder if it would even amount to a single, cumulative person-month of work? | | |
| ▲ | tptacek 27 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I assure you they are doing a shitload of work. They're just not doing it on your case. |
| |
| ▲ | defrost an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I'm not disagreeing on the time frame, just bitching about the impact and the cold truth that often no one wins (save for lawyers). | | |
|
|
|
|
|
