Coquettish Rebirth

According to the legal practice in the United States, before the trial, the plaintiff will hand over to the defendant a copy of the evidence on which it will sue. This practice is mainly to reduce judicial costs.This approach is called "discovery of evidence" in terms of terminology, and such a thing is a unique thing before the US and British legal systems of the sea.The scope of evidence discovery in the United States is very wide, and one party can use the discovery system to ask the other party to provide almost all aspects of information.There are only three valid objections to discovery requirements: one, that the material sought is irrelevant to the case; the circumstances under which the information was provided; and third, the discovery requirement seeks information that falls within the purview of confidentiality.Since the relevant interpretations of the restrictions on the scope of disclosure are loose, in fact there are almost no restrictions on the scope of disclosure in the United States.

After the effective evidence discovery, both parties have new insights and new judgments about their respective cases that are more familiar with each other, more practical, and more touching the essence of the case, so that the result of the judgment is ready to come out and becomes clearer. Therefore, The two parties started their attempts at reconciliation, thus reducing the judicial cost—when the defendant knows that the plaintiff has very important evidence, there is no need to fight the lawsuit, so it is better to settle directly out of court Pull it down, this will save everyone's time, and maybe we can negotiate to pay the other party less money or something.Such a system was rarely used in countries with civil law systems, that is, European countries except the United Kingdom. Later, China, for example, also borrowed such a form of evidence discovery.

However, in China, the evidence must be conducted under the auspices of the court after the application. In the United States, although judges can also preside over it, generally no one presides over it. .As for commercial lawsuits, especially such transnational heavyweight civil lawsuits, there will definitely be evidence disclosure from both parties—in fact, you don’t need to look at how much Lida asked for compensation from Mattel in the indictment, as long as Mattel said in the media that 1800 million toys were recalled because of Rieter's fault.How heavy is such a sentence?If it turns out that Lida is not responsible for this matter, just thinking about it, you will know that this is not something that can be settled with compensation of hundreds of millions of dollars!

You must know that the United States is so rattled that the compensation is different from that in China!In the judicial judgment of compensation in the United States, there is a mechanism called punitive damages or retaliatory damages!In our China.Compensation must be very practical. If the plaintiff asks the defendant to pay 100 million yuan, then he must prove that his interests have indeed lost 100 million yuan due to the defendant's various actions!Otherwise, only tens of thousands of yuan will be lost, plus the inexplicable so-called mental damage fee, it will cost millions of dollars.Even if the court decides that the plaintiff has won, it will not ask the defendant to pay millions in the end. It may just pay tens of thousands of yuan for the original loss, plus a few thousand yuan for mental damage, and finally ask the defendant to publish an apology in the newspaper and so on.

But it is different in the Anglo-American legal system. In the case of the 18th century, the judge ordered a large amount of punitive damages in order to punish the defendant.Maybe the defendant only caused the plaintiff a loss of tens of thousands of yuan, but with the inexplicable mental damages added in the end, it may really end up paying more than a million dollars!Such a kind of existence.The idea itself is to deter those who have done wrong, so that they will not dare to do it again, and at the same time deter others, so that others will not dare to do wrong things!Originally, this kind of thinking was quite good, but Americans, like the Chinese, are particularly good at finding all kinds of loopholes, and are especially good at making use of rules to benefit—after hundreds of years of development, the common people in the United States are simply like troublemakers. Same, even if you go to the beach to bask in the sun and get hit by a coconut falling from a coconut tree on the beach.Even if he was only slightly injured, he would demand hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation!

Moreover, there are a group of lawyers in the United States who specialize in helping ordinary people fight this kind of lawsuit, and they even take the initiative to find all kinds of ordinary people who have had strange things, and actively encourage the other party to file a lawsuit.And the lawyer's requirements are also very simple - there is no need to pay too much lawyer's fees when going to court.And if the lawsuit is successful, the lawyer will eventually be given one-third or even more than half of the compensation!And in this way, it is actually tantamount to a group of unscrupulous lawyers looking for all kinds of troublemakers to blackmail the manufacturer!If it is true that sometimes the manufacturer made a mistake, that’s fine, but more often than not, those lawyers who are extremely capable for money really have no lower limit to blackmail in court!

For example, there was once an example.A big guy in the United States bought a big RV—the kind that is similar to or even bigger than Iveco and other passenger cars. Instead of a seat behind the driver’s seat, it was transformed into a bed, kitchen, TV, bathroom and other facilities. It is such a thing that a car can be used as a house.After such a rough man bought such a car, he drove on the straight road in the western desert and no man's land. The surrounding scenery was too similar, and there were no cars passing by, let alone red light intersections. After driving for a while The old man was sleepy, so he got up and went to the back kitchen to get some coffee to refresh himself-he was driving alone at this time!He just got up from the driver's seat to pour coffee without stopping the car!The result, of course, was that the car went straight off the road and overturned!

The old man was injured all of a sudden, and then the car turned into a mess. At this time, a lawyer came over and said that he would seek compensation from the manufacturer for him!Then, the lawyer said in court that neither the manufacturer's manual nor the seller's sales had mentioned that the driver should not leave the seat during the posture!This should be common sense!As a result, the lawyer said that some people can have no common sense. This is not the fault of the consumers, but the manufacturer did not think that some people may not have the corresponding common sense. Therefore, the damage to the car and the injury of the consumers are all the fault of the manufacturer!

Putting this in China, absolutely everyone will say that the big boss who drives is stupid!Who thinks they can leave their seat while driving?Even if no one specifically emphasized not to leave the seat during the driver's license test, everyone will know!And this American boss, through such unreasonable troubles from lawyers, finally won hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation!Where is the manufacturer going to reason?When they were making cars, how could they have imagined that someone would be so stupid as to leave the seat without stopping in the middle of the car!So to some extent, this kind of lawyer is really an out-and-out legal robber!

And such exaggerated punitive damages are especially prone to appear in cases related to defamation and other rights of reputation!And such a lawsuit between Mattel and Lida is, to put it bluntly, a lawsuit over the rights of reputation!To put it bluntly, Lida sued Mattel for defamation!And this thing involves 1800 million toys, and the price itself is almost [-] million U.S. dollars. If punitive damages are added to this, it might be worth a billion U.S. dollars!Doesn't such a case attract the attention of the media and ordinary people?That must attract!

At the same time, Rieter is also actively preparing for the publicity of evidence.Originally, according to the usual practice, the plaintiff mixed the evidence into a series of documents related to the case and handed it over to the defendant before the deadline for the publication of the evidence was set—yes, this kind of evidence publication was not presided over by the court. You can do all kinds of tricks!Who says Americans don't take advantage of loopholes?According to the regulations of the United States, this evidence disclosure must give the other party documents related to the case, but there is no rule that only direct evidence can be given to the other party!Therefore, for the plaintiff, use a large number of unimportant documents related to the case to cover up important evidence and hand them over to the defendant. Compress the time for the defendant to adjust their litigation strategy according to the evidence!

So if Lida follows the usual practice, it can completely copy all the documents related to the early, middle and late stages of the 1800 million toys, as well as various production documents, and send them to the other party-this is really difficult If so, it is not a problem for a truck to transport ten tons of documents to the other party!But how much manpower and material resources will it take for the other party to find the real key evidence in these paper documents?You must know that these paper documents are not computer documents, and you cannot search directly through keywords!However, the method of scanning and converting images into text by software is not 100% accurate, and there are always mistakes, so human identification is still required!After identifying these ten tons of documents, don't dozens of people read them for two or three days without sleeping?

But this time Rieter did not adopt such a strategy. Instead, it disclosed the evidence directly—directly to the media!Why do you do this?Because such a case is really going to be in court, because it involves major issues, and even involves the safety of American children's toys, it is certain that the third-party appraisal will appear as evidence and be revealed to the defendant—this is not what the plaintiff seeks. Relevant parties in the United States have appraised it, and the court will find a third party to appraise it, and then the appraisal result will be shown to the defendant before the trial!The defendant must know the result of this appraisal anyway, so why keep it hidden?And for Lida, if he hides it, it will easily lead to a long-lasting lawsuit-one lawsuit may last for several years!Civil lawsuits really have to be dragged on, and they can really drag on for a long time!And Mattel's lawyer is not stupid, if they are really determined to find all kinds of reasons to procrastinate, they can really procrastinate for several years!

Perhaps Lida's reputation has not been smeared in the past few years, but it is not easy to continue to find orders to produce - because other toy brand manufacturers may also want to see the outcome of this case before deciding whether to give Lida List!How could it be given if the result didn't come out? What if Lida lost?What if it was Rieter's fault?So in the past few years, Rieter may not be able to get a penny into the account, and has to pay wages to more than 2000 employees!How much pressure is this?So instead of doing this, it is better to disclose the evidence as soon as possible, and then rely on the pressure of public opinion to force Mattel to come to reconciliation as soon as possible!After all, what Lao Zhang wants most is not compensation, but innocence! (~^~)