Last time I checked, neither post traumatic stress syndrome nor depression was cured by money. But then we all know it’s never about the money. So why is she hunting for more? It would be interesting to know what her state of mental health was prior to the accident. Bad things happen everyday. People need to deal with them and get on with their own life.
Although I feel for this person, money will not bring her mother back. I feel she was entitled to the $500,000 that she received but enough is enough. No wonder this world is in the shape it’s in. Everything involves a lawsuit!!
Guess she doesn’t want to spend any part of the more than the first $500,000 on counseling. A second half mil should cure her right up. Oh, and I guess the existing laws of the state don’t count for much any more either.
We all regret the death of loved ones, but don’t put all the blame on the bereaved relative. Some, certainly, but don’t forget the ever-reaching and over-reaching lawyer behind the lawsuit, and the “Justices” on the “Supremes” Court that came up with this new “right” to money damages. Also save some anger for the social-progressive attitudes that everybody is entitled to something, but have no personal responsibilities. Suck it up and get on with the bad things in life.
No, we can put it on the relative. Just because the lawyers want to sue for whatever reason doesn’t mean the relative had to agree with them. She has her own mind and should use it to make money in a more honest fashion. I’m sure the other driver was stressed as well for the actions that took place that day so who will they sue for that??????? America- home of the law suits and the lazy. $500,000 was more than enough. If someone was really stressed they wouldn’t want to keep putting more stress on themselves by reliving the event in court.
The other driver will sue the auto manufacturer; the state – for issuing her a license, registering her vehicle, maintaining the roads, etc; the gal suing her; all the lawyers involved, her clergy and the local McDonalds. I don’t know why those last two will be involved, but they probably will be.
This is a money grab and the judges need to uphold the law of the land, not make new law.
How Sad!! To lose someone you love so much and to witness it! Do any of you have a thinking cap on your head? Have you ever been in an accident where lives were lost or humans severly injured? With you comment it is no wonder that we see the insurance industry in such a screwed up mess. Maybe if you could all walk a mile in someone elses shoes. I pray to God that none of you will ever be my agent! Do you even remember why you got into this business? Oh yeah, let me guess, to line your pockets. Maybe you ought to be kind and send this lady some flowers and touch her heart. There’s a real fact of life for you.
well you please tell me what body of fact .TO THE UNTOUCHABLES. Edward B. Rust, Jr., will be happy to tell you that he is the Chief Executive Officer of State Farm Mutual Insurance Company. He has deep family ties to State Farm, as his father and grand father have both served in that capacity. He will also tell you that he is an educated man who has been to law school and is a past practicing attorney. In addition, he was the chairman of the Coalition for Excellence in Education and a member of George W. Bush’s transition advisory team on education. So with all of that education why will he not deal with his company’s inbred greed. Does he not know that we are in the 21st century where anyone can look on the internet and see the billions of dollars that are being spent to protect their empire from the consumer? In Utah, the company was fine $25 million in punitive damages, in part for the “systematic destruction of documents and systematic manipulation of individual claim files to conceal claim mishandling”. An Idaho appeals court fined the company $9.5 million in punitive damages for making use of “a completely bogus” outside bill review company that helped lower the cost of medical bills. In October of 1999, an Illinois jury rendered a $456 million judgment against State Farm and an additional $730 million in punitive damages for the insurer’s breach of contract with auto policy holders by relying on generic replacement parts. Rust was adamant in his insistence that fraud had not been committed. A class action law suit in the name of State Farm policy holders was filed in 2003 for breach of contract and statutory consumer fraud in which $1.1 billion was awarded to plaintiffs. When a company is misleading the public, should that not be considered fraud? A consumer would go to prison for that type of behavior. State Farm will let you know that, in several states, fraud and abuse is pushing up the cost of auto insurance. A court in late 2001 reached an unfriendly consumer decision that could have the effect of reaching deep into the pockets of the consumer. Sharply higher jury awards in vehicular liability cases are putting additional upward pressure on auto insurance rates. The average jury award in auto liability cases rose from $187,000 to $269,000 in 2000, an increase of 44%. I question if any of the lawsuits would be necessary if the company would just fairly pay their claims. The company represents on their web-site that consumer protection is one of their most important goals, but do they really think that courts would be awarding multiple millions of dollars in bad faith claims if that were their emphasis? State Farm’s ratings are based on their financial strength. State Farm states that their high ratings are also based on strong claims paying ability. With this ability, why is it necessary for their policy holders to allege that the claims department was directed, in evaluating their cases, to take them to trial instead of settling within the limits of the policy? This practice exposed policyholders to judgments above the limits of their policies, when the company was attempting to make an effort to win smaller decisions. Two former in-house attorneys for State Farm contend that they were often called upon by the insurer to represent its’ policy holders and were forced to commit “unlawful and unethical activities, including requiring the two to stay silent about the rights of the policyholders”. State Farm seems to have reckless indifference for the truth for the purpose of corporate and personal economic gain. State Farm should know that continued scrutiny of their claims paying practices will continue especially with the advent of new claims that are surfacing from lawsuits revolving around Hurricane Katrina. A message to Mr. Rust, and any employee of the company that is acting in bad faith for its policy holders
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.
Her claim may have merit. She may really be suffering because of the accident.
But other lawsuits like this have made me so jaded I’m prone to suspect greed more often than I assume someone has honestly suffered a loss.
Sad.
Last time I checked, neither post traumatic stress syndrome nor depression was cured by money. But then we all know it’s never about the money. So why is she hunting for more? It would be interesting to know what her state of mental health was prior to the accident. Bad things happen everyday. People need to deal with them and get on with their own life.
Although I feel for this person, money will not bring her mother back. I feel she was entitled to the $500,000 that she received but enough is enough. No wonder this world is in the shape it’s in. Everything involves a lawsuit!!
Guess she doesn’t want to spend any part of the more than the first $500,000 on counseling. A second half mil should cure her right up. Oh, and I guess the existing laws of the state don’t count for much any more either.
We all regret the death of loved ones, but don’t put all the blame on the bereaved relative. Some, certainly, but don’t forget the ever-reaching and over-reaching lawyer behind the lawsuit, and the “Justices” on the “Supremes” Court that came up with this new “right” to money damages. Also save some anger for the social-progressive attitudes that everybody is entitled to something, but have no personal responsibilities. Suck it up and get on with the bad things in life.
No, we can put it on the relative. Just because the lawyers want to sue for whatever reason doesn’t mean the relative had to agree with them. She has her own mind and should use it to make money in a more honest fashion. I’m sure the other driver was stressed as well for the actions that took place that day so who will they sue for that??????? America- home of the law suits and the lazy. $500,000 was more than enough. If someone was really stressed they wouldn’t want to keep putting more stress on themselves by reliving the event in court.
The other driver will sue the auto manufacturer; the state – for issuing her a license, registering her vehicle, maintaining the roads, etc; the gal suing her; all the lawyers involved, her clergy and the local McDonalds. I don’t know why those last two will be involved, but they probably will be.
This is a money grab and the judges need to uphold the law of the land, not make new law.
How Sad!! To lose someone you love so much and to witness it! Do any of you have a thinking cap on your head? Have you ever been in an accident where lives were lost or humans severly injured? With you comment it is no wonder that we see the insurance industry in such a screwed up mess. Maybe if you could all walk a mile in someone elses shoes. I pray to God that none of you will ever be my agent! Do you even remember why you got into this business? Oh yeah, let me guess, to line your pockets. Maybe you ought to be kind and send this lady some flowers and touch her heart. There’s a real fact of life for you.
well you please tell me what body of fact .TO THE UNTOUCHABLES. Edward B. Rust, Jr., will be happy to tell you that he is the Chief Executive Officer of State Farm Mutual Insurance Company. He has deep family ties to State Farm, as his father and grand father have both served in that capacity. He will also tell you that he is an educated man who has been to law school and is a past practicing attorney. In addition, he was the chairman of the Coalition for Excellence in Education and a member of George W. Bush’s transition advisory team on education. So with all of that education why will he not deal with his company’s inbred greed. Does he not know that we are in the 21st century where anyone can look on the internet and see the billions of dollars that are being spent to protect their empire from the consumer? In Utah, the company was fine $25 million in punitive damages, in part for the “systematic destruction of documents and systematic manipulation of individual claim files to conceal claim mishandling”. An Idaho appeals court fined the company $9.5 million in punitive damages for making use of “a completely bogus” outside bill review company that helped lower the cost of medical bills. In October of 1999, an Illinois jury rendered a $456 million judgment against State Farm and an additional $730 million in punitive damages for the insurer’s breach of contract with auto policy holders by relying on generic replacement parts. Rust was adamant in his insistence that fraud had not been committed. A class action law suit in the name of State Farm policy holders was filed in 2003 for breach of contract and statutory consumer fraud in which $1.1 billion was awarded to plaintiffs. When a company is misleading the public, should that not be considered fraud? A consumer would go to prison for that type of behavior. State Farm will let you know that, in several states, fraud and abuse is pushing up the cost of auto insurance. A court in late 2001 reached an unfriendly consumer decision that could have the effect of reaching deep into the pockets of the consumer. Sharply higher jury awards in vehicular liability cases are putting additional upward pressure on auto insurance rates. The average jury award in auto liability cases rose from $187,000 to $269,000 in 2000, an increase of 44%. I question if any of the lawsuits would be necessary if the company would just fairly pay their claims. The company represents on their web-site that consumer protection is one of their most important goals, but do they really think that courts would be awarding multiple millions of dollars in bad faith claims if that were their emphasis? State Farm’s ratings are based on their financial strength. State Farm states that their high ratings are also based on strong claims paying ability. With this ability, why is it necessary for their policy holders to allege that the claims department was directed, in evaluating their cases, to take them to trial instead of settling within the limits of the policy? This practice exposed policyholders to judgments above the limits of their policies, when the company was attempting to make an effort to win smaller decisions. Two former in-house attorneys for State Farm contend that they were often called upon by the insurer to represent its’ policy holders and were forced to commit “unlawful and unethical activities, including requiring the two to stay silent about the rights of the policyholders”. State Farm seems to have reckless indifference for the truth for the purpose of corporate and personal economic gain. State Farm should know that continued scrutiny of their claims paying practices will continue especially with the advent of new claims that are surfacing from lawsuits revolving around Hurricane Katrina. A message to Mr. Rust, and any employee of the company that is acting in bad faith for its policy holders
I addressed the real