site banner

Friday Fun Thread for July 25, 2025

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

2
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

But the trial judge rejects this argument, and the appeals panel affirms.

I've said this before, but judges see a victim who needs compensation and look around for the nearest involved party with money. They then uses legalese as a backwards rationalisation for the award.

In this case the judge probably realised that neither party likely could afford to pay the 3 million alone, so decided to split it over the two of them.

In work vehicles? They would have been insured commercially. Neither will work again(at fault accidents are a killer for driving a commercial vehicle), but both insurance policies have the money.

I missed that part. Commercial insurance coverage should be enough by a single party to cover this so I don't know why the judge went out of their way to punish the yellow light driver.