united-states libel
Rudy Giuliani sued, why ask for $1.3b?
<p>Rudy Giuliani has been sued. The plaintiffs are asking for S1.3 billion in compensation.</p>
<p>He doesn't have anything like that much money. His net worth is estimated to be $45 million.</p>
<p>Why are they asking for such a large amount, which they could not possibly ever receive?  What is the legal thinking behind it? What is the strategy? $45 million is the maximum they could ever recover, so why not ask for that?</p>

<h2>You claim for the damage you suffered</h2>
<p>If you owe me $130 for unpaid wages, I sue for $130. If you wrote off my $130,000 car I sue for $130,000. If you burnt down my $130 million building, I sue for $130 million. If you did (in my estimate) $1.3 billion damage to my reputation I sue for $1.3 billion. Of course, I will have to prove that the damage was suffered - some damages are easier to prove than others.</p>
<p>Whether the defendant can pay it is irrelevant to the suit.</p>
<p>Of course, if there is a judgement that is more than the defendant’s net worth then any excess is “wasted”. At least commercially. However, commercial return is only one factor involved in deciding to launch a suit. Others include:</p>
<ul>
<li>seeking a precedent</li>
<li>making a statement of principle</li>
<li>vengeance</li>
</ul>

<p>It seems that $1.3bn is not a completely unreasonable amount of damages. And in the USA, there is no penalty for asking for more than you actually expect to get. And if they figured that Giuliani has $45 million, sued for it and got awarded half, they would be kicking themselves. There would also be hope that they could take the court result and go after the $200 million that Trump apparently collected claiming it was for election lawsuits.</p>
<p>In Germany, there is a penalty for huge damage requests. The court will decide first what amount of money the case is about (Dominion: We want $1.3bn. Giuliani: I'll pay you one dollar. Judge: We are arguing about $1,299,999,999). That decides the cost the court will charge, and what the lawyers will charge. The problem is that if Giuliani is ordered to be $130mil, that would be 10% of what is asked for, so he'd pay 10% of both sides' lawyers court, and 10% of the court cost, and Dominion would have to pay 90%. So there you use a realistic number, otherwise you can &quot;win&quot; the case and still end up out of pocket. So the same case in Germany, they would have asked for less.</p>

<p>It's not just Guliani who was sued, it <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axETaiUv9pA" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dominion also sued Ms. Powell</a>. Those two were known as the main <a href="https://www.vice.com/en/article/5dpypz/the-kraken-is-dead-sidney-powells-final-lawsuit-just-got-dismissed" rel="nofollow noreferrer">&quot;Kraken handlers&quot;</a> and both alleged that <em>Dominion would have faked the election</em> among other things. They had neither proof for this, nor could they provide any solid evidence for this when ordered by courts. Or to quote <a href="https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Order-Granting-MTD.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Judge Brann</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and <strong>unsupported by evidence.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>In their suits against Ms Powell and Guliani, Dominion enumerates <em>every part of the sum</em> and how they get to it. Among others, they want compensation for:</p>
<ul>
<li>the loss of contracts</li>
<li>the loss of the company value</li>
<li>the loss of trust in the company</li>
</ul>
<p>They possibly hope that the end result will give two messages:</p>
<ol>
<li>Nobody will ever dare to try to do any Kraken lawsuit ever or be sued out of existence.</li>
<li>The Krakenhandlers will go poor and bankrupt.</li>
</ol>

<p>Suppose they choose to only sue for $45 million, even though they were pretty sure they could have proved $1.3 billion in damages.  Suppose they win and are awarded the full $45 million.  Then when, judgment in hand, they subpoena information about his assets, suppose it turns out he has another $500 million socked away that nobody knew about.  Or, suppose that between now and then, Giuliani's rich uncle dies and leaves him $800 million in his will.</p>
<p>Neither possibility may be very likely, but if either should happen, the plaintiffs would really be kicking themselves that they didn't sue for more.</p>
<p>There may not be very many strong reasons to demand vastly more than they think the defendant has, but there are even fewer reasons not to.</p>
