"keith" wrote in message
...
On Jul 20, 10:48 am, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,



"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
"keith" wrote in message
...
On Jul 20, 8:58 am, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"notbob" wrote in message

news

On 2010-07-20, HeyBub wrote:

I understand that Wal-Mart will NEVER settle a meritless
"slip-and-fall"
case. They may lose money defending such a case but their theory is
that
a
vigorous defense against a single nuisance suit deters 100 others.

Hey, when you've got more money than god. what's a few legal fees. I
doubt they give a flying crap about other nuisance suits. It's just
a
simple exercise in power. They have more money than they can
possible
use, so what else can they do for chuckles. Howzabout flex some
muscle
and see who we can make flinch. Oooh... lookee!! The US government!
Jinkies.

nb

What legal fees? They have salaried lawyers. Employees of the company,
in
other words.

Right. Employees are free. No salaries, no employment taxes, free.
I wonder why 17% of the workers are un(der)employed?

===========

I was about to respond with "You knew what I meant", but then I realized
that you didn't, and explaining it would be pointless because of your
condition.

The on-staff attorneys are a fixed cost. So they are only evaluating
the variable (maybe marginal is the better term) costs of printing,
couriers, etc. This is a whole lot different than most of us where the
ALL of the costs of a suit are variable costs.


Yes, you got my point; you're a moron.

================


Apparently, you didn't know that many companies have their own legal
departments with attorneys on salary. You must be very young. You don't have
much knowledge of the world yet.