(February 15, 2022 at 7:02 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:(February 15, 2022 at 6:53 pm)onlinebiker Wrote: You do realize that this only applies to civil law - and the PLAINTIFF ( alleged victim) has the say of settling or going to court?
The defendant has no choice.
Actually, the defendant DOES have a choice. Both parties do. In point of fact, it is the defendant who almost always makes the offer of a settlement. The plaintiff can either accept or reject the settlement. It’s also important (as Lawz implied) to take into consideration the amount of pressure that a wealthy defendant can bring to bear to get a settlement accepted.
But I think the chief point being made is that, in certain instances (like, you know, rape), the law should be changed to disallow out of court settlements.
Boru
They must do law different where you are from.
Rape - is criminal law. Money is not going to be an issue.
In civil law - where the objective is to provide a monetary remedy - the plaintiff ( the person suing) gives a number that they will consider just.
The defendant ( person being sued) generally does NOT make an offer. If they did - it would be pre- court. They CAN make offer at any point - but generally don't..
The plaintiff can accept any offer at any time. Otherwise it generally goes to a jury to decide in favor of either party - and decides a dollar value at the same time. ( unlike criminal cases - where sentancing is separate from guilt phase.)
