In a message dated 1/15/2007 12:15:10 PM Central Standard Time,
hoyt@cavtel.net writes:
> On Sunday 14 January 2007 12:45, Dave1massey@cs.com wrote:
> >On the other hand, the trucking company may have not fought too hard for PR
> >purposes.
>
> Or the insurance carrier preferred to settle or not defend vigorously; there
>
> may have been facts not in evidence like impairment on the part of the
> otherwise innocent truck driver. We'll never know. The plaintiff's argument
> seems specious, so something else was likely in play.
>
Most companies take the pragmatic approach. If the cost of defense is close
to the penalty they'll just pay the penalty and get on with business. There's
no hope of recovering legal expenses in this case.
Dave
=== This list supported in part by The Vintage Triumph Register
=== http://www.vtr.org
|