In your opinion should companies be allowed to settle for damages in legal cases?

Or should they be made to suffer the full discretion of the law?





After all, if you as an individual kills or maims someone, you end up incarcerated for a very long time.





Why doesn't this happen in court cases where for example the company could be held for criminal negligence but instead settles for damages?In your opinion should companies be allowed to settle for damages in legal cases?
First of all, people can plead guilty to lesser crimes and receive lighter punishment. It's called plea bargaining and it's basically the same thing as a settlement. Criminal defendants do it all the time. In fact, they do it more often than they go to trial. Companies have a right to do it too.





Second, most cases involving companies are civil cases. For obvious reasons, it's usually pointless to charge a company with a crime, unless you plan to collect a fine, because you can't lock up a fictitious legal entity. You need to charge the people who run the company, or who committed the bad acts, with a crime.





A civil suit is typically an action for damages (i.e. money) by one person (or company) against another. If they come to an agreement between themselves and want to settle, why shouldn't the courts let them do that? They both have to agree to it. If the plaintiff doesn't feel that the settlement is large enough, the plaintiff can always force the case into court.





If we didn't allow settlements, we'd be trying about 20 times as many cases per year. We'd need a lot more courts, judges, lawyers, and clerks, and that's all very expensive. Is that really what you want?In your opinion should companies be allowed to settle for damages in legal cases?
You are mixing civil cases and criminal cases. In a criminal case the penalty may be a fine. The company individual involved in the crime may have a criminal charge against him but that is against him not the company. In a civil case, the company is being sued for damages. It may be in the company's best interest to avoid a trial and make a monetary settlement. There are numerous reasons for this action not the least of which they may feel they are not liable but to prove it will cost significantly more than a token payment to get rid of it. Remember many people sue even though the company did nothing wrong because they are looking for easy money. Also, if settlements were not allowed, the Courts would be backlogged even more than they are now.
Absolutely! First of all, settlements keep courts from being horribly clogged. Second, the plaintiff could well lose the case entirely if it goes through trial. Third, I've seen several juries give MUCH smaller awards than were discussed in the settlement negotiations.