[oldalum]

Let's say it was Rosie O'Donnell whose rights were so callously violated.  Do you think the jury award would have been the same?

It is well known that jury awards for non-economic damages (emotional distress, pain and suffering) vary wildly because that type of harm is completely subjective, and juries are influenced by factors other than those a disinterested observer would consider relevant. Doesn't mean they should be abandoned. Some states have a dollar cap on non-economic damage awards for medical malpractice injuries; some have proposed ranges of allowable non-economic damages for different severities of injury (e.g., the range would be much higher for quadriplegia than for loss of vision in one eye).

[oldalum]

Let's say it was Rosie O'Donnell whose rights were so callously violated.  Do you think the jury award would have been the same?

It is well known that jury awards for non-economic damages (emotional distress, pain and suffering) vary wildly because that type of harm is completely subjective, and juries are influenced by factors other than those a disinterested observer would consider relevant. Doesn't mean they should be abandoned. Some states have a dollar cap on non-economic damage awards for medical malpractice injuries; some have proposed ranges of allowable non-economic damages for different severities of injury (e.g., the range would be much higher for quadriplegia than for loss of vision in one eye).