> They are now likely to pay much less...
So then why did they choose to settle? That makes no sense. The only reason a defendant settles is to minimize potential losses.
So then why did they choose to settle? That makes no sense. The only reason a defendant settles is to minimize potential losses.
???
If a company voluntarily enters into a settlement, it's because they think they're saving money somewhere else.
In this case the Sacklers are granted immunity to all future lawsuits.
the settlement was also in the interest of the government, which may now end up with tens of thousands of separate suits to manage and $6bn less to help manage the crisis unfolding in the meantime
don't get me wrong, the sacklers could end up worse off... but it's a big if and will take much much longer