Given that the Perry plaintiffs didn't ask for money in their complaint (other than "Granting such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper." in the original Prayer for Relief), how likely is it that the court would grant money damages and not touch the NWS?
Courts ALWAYS prefer to give money damages rather than provide equitable relief. It's just much easier for them. So, in answer to your question, I would say that it is very likely the courts would grant money damages rather than touch the NWS...though not guaranteed.
It seems like a strange resolution, especially if the plaintiffs are not happy with the amount of money. Could that be appealed again?
It would not be that strange of a resolution. Let's not forget the main reason the lawsuits exist...they aren't suing because the NWS is burdening their way of life here...they are suing because the NWS has cost them money. The courts could decide to remedy this by finding money damages and assigning them to the plaintiffs.
As for whether the plaintiff's are happy with the amount of money or not,...that isn't up to them. Judgments are determined by the court, not by the plaintiff.
However,...that being said, yes they can appeal the amount of the money judgment without appealing the ruling itself. The appeals court would review the amount of damages and determine if they were reasonable or not.
Even then, if the plaintiffs get money they will still have their shares and could very well continue to fight.
This is a false statement. After plaintiff's have won or lost their lawsuit, they can not sue again. FRCP pleading rules require all known lawsuits to be filed at the same time. A plaintiff can not sue for something, win, and then file a second lawsuit for a related matter. No matter how this fight ends, that's it for the plaintiffs that are in the suit.
Also, I would add that they would not necessarily have their shares. The courts could, within their right, undo the contract that created the sale of shares as part of the judgment. For example, if you buy a car that turns out to be a lemon, and you sue for the price of the car, the court isn't going to give you the price of the car and let you keep the car. The car would go back to the other party. This is the same thing.
I can't see all the lawsuits disappearing via courts ordering damages to be paid and not touching the NWS.
The lawsuits don't need to disappear. We are only talking about the plaintiff's in the Perry case right now. They can be remedied without affecting other cases.
