Posted on 03/21/2015 7:26:35 PM PDT by PROCON
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A California trial judge ruled Saturday that a woman suing a Silicon Valley venture capital firm in a high-profile gender bias case may seek punitive damages that could add tens of millions of dollars to the $16 million in lost wages and bonuses she is pursuing.
San Francisco Superior Court Judge Harold Kahn denied a request by lawyers for Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers to have Ellen Pao's demand for unspecified punitive damages thrown out. Pao, the interim CEO of the news and social networking site Reddit, claims she was passed over for a promotion at the firm because she is a woman and then fired in 2012 after she complained.
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.myway.com ...
We’ll, without attorneys do you think she would have a chance to make her case in court? No sympathy for the company if they discriminated against her and then fired her when she complained.
KP and all companies in California are in a hostile anti business Marxist environment and this jury award is likely to be through the roof.
You reap what you sew. Many, many states that are much more friendly to business would welcome KP with open arms. Last company out of Kalifornia please turn out the lights.
Long overdue tort reform is in order.
You’re quite the liberal, aren’t you.
This is one of the rare instances where trial attorneys are a good thing.
“(C)heat and steal from employees every chance they get”? Sounds a lot like communist agitprop.
So California’s anti-commerce laws are a good thing, then?
We don’t know her intent with respect to her claims.
And people use Reddit?
Reddit: a wretched hive of scum and villainy..
Let alone the fact that they are hiring H-1B visa holders to replace Amerian workers! I have no sympathy for these scumbags!
As to her intent, it's anyone's guess; bottom line, the lawyers are the winners.
Go GIT 'EM, Trial Attorneys! Rip bloody chunks out of those ***holes, and keep 40% for yourself!
In this particular instance, the lady's sharks are demanding $16 million in compensation, which if awarded by the jury would justify up to $160 million in punitive damages. Some hundred million dollar plus jury verdicts will be a good start here.
The only endgame here will be that Texas leaves Silicon Valley a burned-out hulk once the jobs move there. Funny how the business, welfare and tax laws “necessitate” the employment laws; quite the game.
From reading "Jobs", I get the impression some of the founding employees were screwed big time. What's your view, if you have one?
What do you know about the fees the lawyer will get? Have you seen their retainer agreement?
For all any of us knows, it’s a contingency case where a dozen lawyers and their staffs can work for NOTHING for years, and NOTHING at the end if they lose. And, if they win, they can get 33-30% of the award.
How many who complain about legal fees would be willing to work for NOTHING for a couple of years, and potentially get nothing when it’s over?
Thanks for your insight, counselor, I hope future tort reform puts you in the poorhouse.
>>>claims she was passed over for a promotion at the firm because she is a woman and then fired in 2012 after she complained<<<
She must have some Ironclad Proof to support that allegation. Did she work for Bill Clinton?
A classic example of why companies are leaving California and moving to more business friendly climates like Texas.
Austin Texas is rapidly becoming the new Silicon Valley.
The 20th Century was the _wettest_ century in the past 2000 years. Normal precipitation over the last 2000 years has been 2/3 of that. A real drought, by historical standards, is 1/3 of the 20th Century normal. The best we can hope for is a return to normal rain and snowfall, i.e., down from 200 million acre feet per year to 134.
A whole bunch of experts are predicting we're in for 1-2 CENTURIES of an average of 67 million acre feet per year. See:
long magazine article - http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/02/drying-west/kunzig-text
and book - _The West without Water: What Past Floods, Droughts, and Other Climatic Clues Tell Us about Tomorrow_, by B. Lynn Ingram and Frances Malamud-Roam
Probably, but cheating on the wealth produced by a successful startup is quite different from cheating on employment compensation. The difference is agreement on sharing a risk.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.