MGT response

discussion_1.docx

Chapter 7

Pain and suffering can be very tricky in a tort case because unlike the other types of compensatory claims it can be almost impossible to determine a dollar amount that goes along with it. For example, when deciding a persons past, present, and future medical expenses or their economic loss it can be easy to determine a fair amount that will cover such losses. Although, because pain and suffering cant be monetized accurately it leaves the decision up to the judge to decide what they feel the person deserves. Although I do not see how capping the awards relates to the governmental separation of power it may have to do with the power of large corporations who can using their infinite resources to persuade and push for a reform to minimize/cap the amount a plaintiff can receive. This can be very unfair to the plaintiff because they may have had their life as they know it flipped upside down. For example losing their limbs or extreme life changing brain damage which I believe justifies a much higher reward for them to live out their lives as comfortable as possible.

Chapter 11

I agree that the US supreme court should allow corporations to uphold the first amendment rights of freedom of speech. I think this because if a corporation wants to speak out, they can, knowing that they are speaking out for the corporation and the words they use could hurt business. However, in some cases it could help. If a corporation speaks politically, it could wave to one side or another, and in my opinion is not the smartest idea. But if a corporation speaks out on an incident that took place, or about say, animal abuse for example, I believe that could be beneficial. On a more serious note, corporations having this freedom, is more to discuss political situations and topics that have a lot of passion and are controversial, and if a corporation wants to speak out on it, I agree with the Supreme Court in allowing them to do so.