We are all aware, some painfully so, of banner headline jury verdicts. They have now breached the $1 billion threshold and are ubiquitous in the news, on billboards, in airports, and just about everywhere else.
We also know how we got here -- through the perfect storm of political and cultural polarization, social inflation, COVID-19 angst, corporate mistrust leading to anti-corporate bias, and plaintiffs' attorneys honing their reptile theories to an art to get juries to send messages with high numbers. The higher the number, the clearer the message.
The big verdicts have led to a trend of bigger settlements as companies seek to avoid facing the reputational damage of being 'canceled' or suffering a bet-the-company 'shock' verdict. Just ask the major transportation company that recently settled a wrongful-death suit for $150 million involving a vehicle left parked in the lane of travel by one of its drivers and causing the deaths of two juveniles. The reason for the high settlement? 'Corporate defendants are facing 'nuclear verdicts' across the country....' And there appears to be no end in sight to this alarming trend.
So what do corporate defendants do in this unfriendly, volatile environment?
