This lawsuit from the victims was as dumb as every one people want to levy at gun manufacturers for shootings.

Cinemark is correctly owed that money, but this is the right thing to do. Good for them.

Why were you boycotting them? Why do you think they’re awful?

WTO only uses international courts if the parties can’t agree where to settle the dispute. The softwood lumber thing has been volleying between US and Canadian courts since the mid 1980s.

Thanks for the insightful comment, I realized it’s all speculation which is why I included “probably” in the statement.

When were they dicks? When they were trying to give money to the grieving people in the original settlement? Or when they defended themselves from a frivolous lawsuit?

Well, Walmart would pay your legal fees, if that was stipulated in the suit.

Because war reparations are forced upon a country. Condolence payments are voluntary. It makes a huge difference.

Saudia Arabia has assets in the US which could be seized via the judgement process.

Given that the theater chain tried to settle the case (which means paying the plaintiffs to drop the suit), and the plaintiffs rejected it, I can’t see how they’re in the wrong.

They had no case at all and some scumbag lawyer convinced them to pursue anyway. The entire reason for Cinemark’s $700k claim was to get them to agree not to pursue appeals that would rack up additional legal fees. It doesn’t make them look great, but people are so forgetful that it probably didn’t affect them very…

Yes... they refused the settlement Cinemark offered (even though Cinemark didn’t even have to offer it!). They wanted to play hardball, they lost, and you owe attorney fees when that happens.

Which is why they offered to pay out a settlement in the first place, to dodge the costs of a lawsuit. But too many people read an admission of guilt or weakness into a settlement offer (especially when encouraged by their dumb lawyers), rather than an attempt to wave off an expensive nuisance.

War reparations are a thing the losing side of a conflict are forced to pay. War reparations is what Donald Trump refers too when he says we should’ve taken Iraq’s oil.

I think the families (and the lawyers) SHOULD pay for being such ambulance chasers.

The plaintiffs (who lost) would not have won on appeal. They would, however, be liable for the attorney’s fees spent by Cinemark for the trial and for the appeal. So the plaintiffs already owe Cinemark $700k for the trial, and would owe more when they lost the appeal.

I think we all expected this. The lawsuit was bullshit from the start, and frankly they should have taken the settlement that Cinemark offered that they absolutely did not deserve when they had the chance. I definitely do think it is nice of Cinemark not to seek these fees, since they have every right to do so under…

Whose hailing this as a triumph? By Colorado law Cinemark had the right to recoup costs in a litigation case that the plantiffs lost. They didn’t want to keep having to pay for appeals and agreed to not pursue the claim if the plaintiffs agreed to no further appeals. Oh as for ‘next time we might not be so generous so…

Cinematic was always going to do this. They never wanted to make the plaintiffs pay, just wanted to make them stop suing on something that was never going to win and waste more of the company’s money.

That’s good. “Because I can,” isn’t always a good enough reason for doing something.