http://www.startribune.com/blogs/63717157.html?elr=KArksUUUycaEacyUF: "Would you consider if Jamie Leigh had gotten a settlement of $50 that she would have 'prevailed' under this definition?"
B: "Senator Franken --"
F: "Please answer yes or no, sir."
B: "No, let me just say --"
F: "Please answer yes or no sir. Do you say no?"
B: "I say no"
F: "So in other words the statistics on who prevailed and who didn’t prevail – what would she have needed to have gotten, $100? Would she have prevailed if she had gotten $100?"
B: "I think it’s a distinction … what we’re talking about --"
F: "Answer yes or no, please sir."
De Bernardo eventually conceded that he did not know whether $50 would be considered "prevailing" in the statistic, leading to this exchange several minutes later:
F: "You told me that you don’t know if $50 to Ms. Jones would be considered in your statistic – whether that would be her prevailing. So you don’t really know too much about your statistic."
B: "There are two studies --"
F: "Here’s another statistic, sir, from the National Workrights Institute."
B: "Senator can I --"
F: "No. Give me a second. found that the mean damages awarded by arbitrations was $49,000, the mean damages awarded by district courts was $530,000. That seems to be more beneficial to the employee, doesn’t it?"
B: (Inaudible)
F: "So thank you, sir. Thank you Mr. Chairman."