I mean, I get it. Appellate courts don't typically reconsider a jury's allocation of fault. It's a fact issue. Which is why the Court of Appeal leaves it alone here, and affirms a $24.7 million award.
But allocating 60% of the responsibility for the molestation to the foster agency who screened the parent, and only 35% to the father who actually did the molestation? (Plus 5% to the mother.)
Come on. No one outside the legal system would actually find such an allocation rational.
