Wait, what? Aurora massacre survivors end up owing theater $700K after suing

[Fargo]

Like I said a ways back, Cinemark gets some good publicity for 700K. You had a bunch of shot up and almost certainly judgment proof plaintiffs likely already in the middle of bankruptcy due to medical expenses. I've thought for a long time that not trying to enforce this award was both the right "moral" and pragmatic thing to do.

If they enforce it, I would guarantee they lose more than 700K in revenue due to bad publicity. I can tell you that this is the first time I've ever viewed Cinemark in a positive light.

 

[HoughMade]

They were never going to collect. There is no appeal. All's good.

From a PR perspective, certainly it doesn't hurt, but who decides what theater to go to based upon the litigation position of the parent company?

 

[ljk]

They need to get every penny of the judgement.

 

[jamil]

They need to get every penny of the judgement.

Nah. 700K is nothing to Cinemark. Taking that money from the victims would make them look like *******s. I think the right judgement was made, Cinemark isn't responsible for the victims' losses, but it serves no useful purpose to take that money.

 

[pudly]

It serves the purpose of being a warning to the next folks considering a similar suit.

 

[jamil]

It serves the purpose of being a warning to the next folks considering a similar suit.

Losing the suit serves that purpose. Cinemark gains noting more in that regard if they demand the payment or not. I don't think the plaintiffs were being greedy. I do think they associated the legal action with a sense of getting justice for their losses and to satisfy their grief. If it had been just about the money, they'd have taken the settlement offered to get what they could get. But what they wanted was for the court to say it was the Boogiemen's fault and to make the boogiemen pay. If nothing else Cinemark showed themselves not to be the boogiemen.

 

[pudly]

Losing the suit serves that purpose. Cinemark gains noting more in that regard if they demand the payment or not. I don't think the plaintiffs were being greedy.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on each of these points.