In past court cases, judges have chastised and even fined State Farm for withholding records the company was ordered to produce. Evidence the company destroyed documents has been presented in several cases.
In the Oklahoma case, after State Farm finally turned over to the court a “claims legal research” DVD and other records, Judge Richard G. Van Dyck told company attorneys
“As I was watching these tapes I just want to say this for the record, the hair on the back of my neck did — did stand up because I was seeing things there that early on in this case I was told by (State Farm) defense counsel didn’t exist and couldn’t be produced. So I’m not real happy with that and I want to remind all counsel that their ethical responsibilities as attorneys outweigh the wishes of their clients
I clearly stated, for anyone objective and intelligent enough to read, that WE ALL DO CARE for the survivors. I addressed the real problems created by the make-money lawyers, who SELL THE SURVIVORS on the BIG MONEY they can get. And the problem of overly liberal judges who use their appointed or elected positions to MAKE LAWS that are the province of the legislatures. THESE are the facts of life.
It amazes me how compassionate people can be when doling out someone else’s money; the judges, the attorneys already have good paying jobs so it’s easy to feel sad for someone’s loss and try to help soothe their senses. Tell me why $500,000 was not enough? That is what the insurance company underwrote and that is what the legal contracts specified to all parties of that contract. How can expanding coverge for unintended events make this lady whole? I don’t care if she was tramatized; I’ve lived with trauma since birth but never thought that anyone OWED me anything. Supposedly there is nothing free in life, not even a cold bowl of soup. Apparently that’s changing….when do I collect???
Jablonowska’s Honda Civic to visit family in Wallington. Baczewska was seated in the front passenger seat. While
proceeding northbound on Route 21 in Newark, Jablonowska’s vehicle was struck from the rear by a vehicle driven
by David Suther. The impact caused Jablonowska’s Civic to crash into a concrete balustrade, causing Jablonowska
to temporarily lose consciousness. When she regained awareness, she noticed pain in her head, leg and chest.
Jablonowska also heard her mother moaning and calling for help. Once she was able to turn herself around toward
the passenger side, Jablonowska observed that her mother’s head was slumped forward and she was not moving. A
distraught Jablonowska, suspecting that her mother was seriously injured, exited her car to get assistance.
Jablonowska “was in shock” and “trembling all over” as she responded to a police officer’s questions about
the accident. She and her mother were taken to the hospital by ambulance. Jablonowska was treated and released.
Baczewska sustained fractures of her back, neck and ribs. In addition, the force of the collision partially severed her
aorta, causing her to bleed into her thoracic cavity and resulting in her death.
Jablonowska sued David and Teresa Suther (hereinafter, Suther) for claims of emotional distress (based
on witnessing her mother’s severe injuries and death), wrongful death and survivorship. To support her emotionaldistress
claim, Jablonowska sought to demonstrate that, after her mother’s death, she experienced “frequent crying,
headaches, palpitations, chest pain, shortness of breath, nausea and vomiting, dizziness, [and] tingling and numbness
in her extremities.” She also suffered from nightmares and flashbacks of the accident. Her appetite decreased, and
her memory and concentration became impaired. Three months after the accident, she began psychotherapy and
eventually was diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder.
Jablonowska’s negligent-infliction-of-emotional-distress claim was based on the cause of action recognized
in Portee. In her complaint, Jablonowska alleged that Suther’s negligent operation of his motor vehicle caused her to
experience the psychological trauma of witnessing her mother’s injuries and subsequent death at the accident scene,
resulting in her severe mental impairment. Suther moved for dismissal of the Portee claim after Jablonowska failed
to produce a physician’s certification within sixty days of the filing of Suther’s answer, as required by AICRA’s
verbal threshold provision. Jablonowska argued that the physician’s certification and bodily injury threshold
requirements did not apply to her emotional-distress claim. Concluding that the verbal threshold requirement
applied, the trial court dismissed the emotional-distress claim for failure to satisfy the physician-certification
requirement and for failure to produce objective evidence of permanent bodily injury. A motion for reconsideration
was denied. A subsequent motion to submit Jablonowska’s doctor’s certification was denied. Because Suther
conceded liability, a three-day trial was held and was limited to the issue of damages for the wrongful death and
survivorship claims. The jury returned a verdict of $205,018 for the wrongful death claim and $350,000 for the
survivorship claims. The court denied Suther’s motion for a new trial.
2
Suther appealed, arguing that Jablonowska failed to present sufficient evidence to support a wrongful death
claim; that the trial court erred when charging the jury; that the damages award was excessive; and that
Jablonowska’s attorney’s misconduct warranted a new trial. Jablonowska cross-appealed, arguing that her Portee
claim should not have been dismissed. The Appellate Division rejected all of Suther’s claims and affirmed the
dismissal of Jablonowska’s Portee claim. The panel concluded that the verbal threshold’s requirements applied to
her Portee claim, that emotional distress is not enough to carry her over the threshold, and that she otherwise failed
to demonstrate objective clinical evidence of permanent injury required to maintain a cause of action governed by
the verbal threshold.
The Supreme Court granted certification.
HELD: Jablonowska’s negligent-infliction-of-emotional-distress claim, fashioned on the liability theory set out in
Portee v, Jaffee, is independent of the requirements
Send Feedback E-mail this Article Print this Article Article Reprints
State Farm Insurance’s chairman and CEO received an 82 percent raise after the company posted a record profit last year, a statement from the Bloomington-Ill.-based insurer said this week.
Advertisement
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Ed Rust Jr. got a $5.26 million raise. He earned $11.66 million in 2006 with a base salary of $1.77 million and results-based bonus of $9.89 million, the statement said. Rust made $6.4 million in 2005 and $5.5 million in 2004.
The absence of a major catastrophe helped the insurer generate a record $5.32 billion profit last year, compared to $3.24 billion in 2005 when Hurricane Katrina hit the Mississippi Gulf Coast, release said.
Ah, but Nobody, haven’t you been listening to them? This person is telling us all very important stuff that we need to know so we can . . . so we can . . . I’m not sure why he or she is doing it other than to annoy us. I know we’ve been exhorted to google a lawsuit and so forth, but I’m not sure exactly what this person wants.
Hey, no name, pick a screen name, stick with it and stay on topic. Or at least stay tangential to the topic. At the very least give us a break from your near-constant cutting and pasting of whatever it is you are cutting and pasting.
I apologize for the interruption; we will now return to your regularly scheduled diatribe.
Boring, aren’t they. State Farm finally turned over to the court a “claims legal research” DVD and other records, Judge Richard G. Van Dyck told company attorneys
“As I was watching these tapes I just want to say this for the record, the hair on the back of my neck did — did stand up because I was seeing things there that early on in this case I was told by (State Farm) defense counsel didn’t exist and couldn’t be produced. So I’m not real happy with that and I want to remind all counsel that their ethical responsibilities as attorneys outweigh the wishes of their clients
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Oh, and I guess the existing laws of the state don’t count for much any more either.
In past court cases, judges have chastised and even fined State Farm for withholding records the company was ordered to produce. Evidence the company destroyed documents has been presented in several cases.
In the Oklahoma case, after State Farm finally turned over to the court a “claims legal research” DVD and other records, Judge Richard G. Van Dyck told company attorneys
“As I was watching these tapes I just want to say this for the record, the hair on the back of my neck did — did stand up because I was seeing things there that early on in this case I was told by (State Farm) defense counsel didn’t exist and couldn’t be produced. So I’m not real happy with that and I want to remind all counsel that their ethical responsibilities as attorneys outweigh the wishes of their clients
I clearly stated, for anyone objective and intelligent enough to read, that WE ALL DO CARE for the survivors. I addressed the real problems created by the make-money lawyers, who SELL THE SURVIVORS on the BIG MONEY they can get. And the problem of overly liberal judges who use their appointed or elected positions to MAKE LAWS that are the province of the legislatures. THESE are the facts of life.
It amazes me how compassionate people can be when doling out someone else’s money; the judges, the attorneys already have good paying jobs so it’s easy to feel sad for someone’s loss and try to help soothe their senses. Tell me why $500,000 was not enough? That is what the insurance company underwrote and that is what the legal contracts specified to all parties of that contract. How can expanding coverge for unintended events make this lady whole? I don’t care if she was tramatized; I’ve lived with trauma since birth but never thought that anyone OWED me anything. Supposedly there is nothing free in life, not even a cold bowl of soup. Apparently that’s changing….when do I collect???
Jablonowska’s Honda Civic to visit family in Wallington. Baczewska was seated in the front passenger seat. While
proceeding northbound on Route 21 in Newark, Jablonowska’s vehicle was struck from the rear by a vehicle driven
by David Suther. The impact caused Jablonowska’s Civic to crash into a concrete balustrade, causing Jablonowska
to temporarily lose consciousness. When she regained awareness, she noticed pain in her head, leg and chest.
Jablonowska also heard her mother moaning and calling for help. Once she was able to turn herself around toward
the passenger side, Jablonowska observed that her mother’s head was slumped forward and she was not moving. A
distraught Jablonowska, suspecting that her mother was seriously injured, exited her car to get assistance.
Jablonowska “was in shock” and “trembling all over” as she responded to a police officer’s questions about
the accident. She and her mother were taken to the hospital by ambulance. Jablonowska was treated and released.
Baczewska sustained fractures of her back, neck and ribs. In addition, the force of the collision partially severed her
aorta, causing her to bleed into her thoracic cavity and resulting in her death.
Jablonowska sued David and Teresa Suther (hereinafter, Suther) for claims of emotional distress (based
on witnessing her mother’s severe injuries and death), wrongful death and survivorship. To support her emotionaldistress
claim, Jablonowska sought to demonstrate that, after her mother’s death, she experienced “frequent crying,
headaches, palpitations, chest pain, shortness of breath, nausea and vomiting, dizziness, [and] tingling and numbness
in her extremities.” She also suffered from nightmares and flashbacks of the accident. Her appetite decreased, and
her memory and concentration became impaired. Three months after the accident, she began psychotherapy and
eventually was diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder.
Jablonowska’s negligent-infliction-of-emotional-distress claim was based on the cause of action recognized
in Portee. In her complaint, Jablonowska alleged that Suther’s negligent operation of his motor vehicle caused her to
experience the psychological trauma of witnessing her mother’s injuries and subsequent death at the accident scene,
resulting in her severe mental impairment. Suther moved for dismissal of the Portee claim after Jablonowska failed
to produce a physician’s certification within sixty days of the filing of Suther’s answer, as required by AICRA’s
verbal threshold provision. Jablonowska argued that the physician’s certification and bodily injury threshold
requirements did not apply to her emotional-distress claim. Concluding that the verbal threshold requirement
applied, the trial court dismissed the emotional-distress claim for failure to satisfy the physician-certification
requirement and for failure to produce objective evidence of permanent bodily injury. A motion for reconsideration
was denied. A subsequent motion to submit Jablonowska’s doctor’s certification was denied. Because Suther
conceded liability, a three-day trial was held and was limited to the issue of damages for the wrongful death and
survivorship claims. The jury returned a verdict of $205,018 for the wrongful death claim and $350,000 for the
survivorship claims. The court denied Suther’s motion for a new trial.
2
Suther appealed, arguing that Jablonowska failed to present sufficient evidence to support a wrongful death
claim; that the trial court erred when charging the jury; that the damages award was excessive; and that
Jablonowska’s attorney’s misconduct warranted a new trial. Jablonowska cross-appealed, arguing that her Portee
claim should not have been dismissed. The Appellate Division rejected all of Suther’s claims and affirmed the
dismissal of Jablonowska’s Portee claim. The panel concluded that the verbal threshold’s requirements applied to
her Portee claim, that emotional distress is not enough to carry her over the threshold, and that she otherwise failed
to demonstrate objective clinical evidence of permanent injury required to maintain a cause of action governed by
the verbal threshold.
The Supreme Court granted certification.
HELD: Jablonowska’s negligent-infliction-of-emotional-distress claim, fashioned on the liability theory set out in
Portee v, Jaffee, is independent of the requirements
State Farm CEO Gets 82% Pay Raise
March 7, 2007
Send Feedback E-mail this Article Print this Article Article Reprints
State Farm Insurance’s chairman and CEO received an 82 percent raise after the company posted a record profit last year, a statement from the Bloomington-Ill.-based insurer said this week.
Advertisement
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Ed Rust Jr. got a $5.26 million raise. He earned $11.66 million in 2006 with a base salary of $1.77 million and results-based bonus of $9.89 million, the statement said. Rust made $6.4 million in 2005 and $5.5 million in 2004.
The absence of a major catastrophe helped the insurer generate a record $5.32 billion profit last year, compared to $3.24 billion in 2005 when Hurricane Katrina hit the Mississippi Gulf Coast, release said.
Don’t you just wish Mr/Ms State Farm hater/no name would just give the cutting and pasting a rest? Boring, aren’t they?
Ah, but Nobody, haven’t you been listening to them? This person is telling us all very important stuff that we need to know so we can . . . so we can . . . I’m not sure why he or she is doing it other than to annoy us. I know we’ve been exhorted to google a lawsuit and so forth, but I’m not sure exactly what this person wants.
Hey, no name, pick a screen name, stick with it and stay on topic. Or at least stay tangential to the topic. At the very least give us a break from your near-constant cutting and pasting of whatever it is you are cutting and pasting.
I apologize for the interruption; we will now return to your regularly scheduled diatribe.
Boring, aren’t they. State Farm finally turned over to the court a “claims legal research” DVD and other records, Judge Richard G. Van Dyck told company attorneys
“As I was watching these tapes I just want to say this for the record, the hair on the back of my neck did — did stand up because I was seeing things there that early on in this case I was told by (State Farm) defense counsel didn’t exist and couldn’t be produced. So I’m not real happy with that and I want to remind all counsel that their ethical responsibilities as attorneys outweigh the wishes of their clients
what this person wants.
YOU TO ALL WAKE UP!!!!!!!