Yes, he had a choice in selecting the amount. The amount, however, must be selected based on the jurisdiction in place. Jurisdiction dictated an amount of 11.3 million dollars. Yes, this is a lot. No, I don't think the woman deserved this. But this *is* how the law works. Whether or not you agree with the amount is completely irrelevant.SuAside said:
The plaintiff never asked for a certain amount, so this is not anywhere near what I said. Get your facts right, SuAside.
The plaintiff, however, did make the claim that her business and person was ruined due to the defendant's slander and libel. And because the defendant never showed up to fight this claim, the judge had to judge guilty. Hence he had to select a punishment in line with what the defendant was charged with (slander and libel, I believe, which led to the plaintiffs person and business being ruined). Looking at jurisdiction, then, the judge (or jury, doesn't matter) had to come to a similar amount.
The plaintiff claimed that she had been ruined by the defendant. The defendant is found guilty of this fact. Hence the judge or jury *has* to award damages in line with the claim of the defendant's business being ruined. This is simple law.
However, when you seek a certain amount of damages this works differently. You always have to make a claim, and you can then say 'I want this amount' but the judge has to decide whether or not the amount you seek is in line with the claim you made if you are judged to be in the right.
