How can you say that there are no merits to this case after reading a 4 or 5 paragraph description on an insurance news site? Have you read all the depositions, gone through all the evidence?
Or are you making a judgement based on feeling and instinct, both of which aren\’t valid legal arguments?
Scott, even though I\’m skeptical of the case, at least I\’m smart enough not to make a proclamation regarding its merits. You\’re the one looking like the fool.
I can\’t help but reply after reading Realist\’s message:
People like bunny can not help themselves, they are like sheep that follow the herd and have the herd (PC) mentality. They can not and will not think for themselves. They are quick to scream racism but do not see how hypocritical they are by screaming an \”ism\”. It\’s sad.
Excuse me, but you do not know me and your judgment of me is completely wrong. This should not be a place for personal attacks and that is certainly not what I intended in my earlier message. I made an observation based on what I had read here. While I was not screaming, I do think we all need to be very careful so that nothing we do is racist. Sometimes we fail this even when we are well-intentioned. I work long, hard hours for humanitarian organizations to ensure peace can be experienced by more people. Realist, your remarks were totally off-base.
So let me get this straight: The argument is that the right to be free from enslavement came first, presumably from God, and therefore slavery was illegal even though it was legal. Is that it?
Of course, some goofy judge might see the merit of such an outrageous concept trumping ex post facto prohibitions, but it is obvious that you are fishing about for something other than the Constitution and normally accepted western legal concepts to get money for nothing from corporations that would rather settle out of court than go to trial.
Judges these days quote the laws of other countries and treaties that we haven\’t signed as bases for their stupid rulings. No doubt one could be found who would do so if this gets to trial in order to assuage his guilty conscience over things his ancestors might have done.
I\’m going to do something I\’ve always wanted to do: our geneology. Maybe I can find somebody who fits the \”one drop rule\” in the family tree, and I can cash in too!
I am fascinated by the emotions this article evoked. Just thought I\’d point out that the 7th Circuit is hearing oral argument of the appeal (by plaintiffs) of the DISMISSAL of their case by the US District court judge (Norgle) in July 2005. Here\’s a blurb from the Chicago Sun Times dated July 6, 2005:
\”A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by slave descendants seeking reparations from corporations that benefitted from slave labor — the end of the line in U.S. District Court.
U.S. District Judge Charles R. Norgle said slavery has caused \”tremendous suffering and ineliminable scars,\” but an attempt to seek reparations \”more than a century after the end of the Civil War and the formal abolition of slavery fails.\”
Norgle said plaintiffs in the case did not prove they were personally injured by slavery, adding that a genealogical tie to slaves is not enough to show that injury. Norgle said the plaintiffs failed to show any \”concrete and particular\” suffering that wasn\’t true of African Americans in general. Those suing failed to allege any conduct by the 18 defendants that individually affected any of the plaintiffs, he said.
Norgle also cited long-standing legal doctrine barring the courts from deciding reparations.
It\’s a decision up to the president and Congress to make, he said.
The lawsuit, filed in 2002, sought to hold 18 corporations liable for their reaping benefits from slave labor before, during and after the Civil War.\”
On September 27, 2006, the 7th Circuit will hear arguments on plaintiffs have appeal of the dismissal of their case. Seems to me to be an issue for Congress – & is very much a valid issue for the public discourse.
You may be interested in Wikipedia\’s synopsis of the history of this issue generally –
A lot of bad things happened to people of all backgrounds in the development of this country, and no one should ever minimize how horrid and what a national embarrassment slavery was. Lest we never forget, as the Holocaust survivors say….works here just as well. And the world learns….
It\’s like these folks just WANT to keep the thorn in their side because if they remove and let go of the pain they wouldn\’t know what to do with themselves. We all know people who just thrive on anger because they just can\’t figure out that happiness is a state of mind they can CHOOSE for themselves. Argument for the sake of the argument is not a valid argument. Repeat after me: Frivolous Lawsuit only costs, never gains.
Perhaps a better approach for these plaintiffs would be to start some educational program to better our country\’s understanding of the past instead of costing all of us in the end. What did I ever do to deserve having to pay (and we all will) for a lawsuit for things that happened when my ancestors were still in Ireland, Germany and Norway?? What the heck is fair about that?? My uncle\’s merchant ship was sunk by the Germans in WWII. Should I bring suit against the Germans for unrealized income and loss of those lives? How ridiculous!!
I have 3 words for these pathetic people….GET A LIFE. The American Blacks (and a lot of other people, myself included) of the 40\’s, 50\’s and 60\’s worked so hard to attain equality for all citizens in this country, regardless of race. I have no doubt their hard working ancestors would roll over in their graves if they knew they were perpetuating such hatred, not based on race or ethnicity, but rather on STUPIDITY AND GREED!
I asked an attorney friend for his take on this matter, and his remarks follow verbatim:
So how does that mean the insurance company is liable?
At least with the railroad conglomerates (which are corporate successors
in interest to the railroad companies that used slave labor in the 1840s
and 1850s), I understand the argument; those railroad companies took
your great-great-grandfather\’s labor without paying him for it, his heir
should have a right to recover against the railroad company\’s successor.
(Of course, that ignores that the plaintiffs in this suit are asking for
the creation of a humanitarian trust fund, not any actual damages for
Company X harming Individual Y, plus 160 years of interest.)
I suppose you\’d need to argue that there\’s some current statutory
prohibition on taking out life insurance policies on other people
without their consent — which there may well be, for all I know — and
that the statutory remedy is that the insured person can recover
something from the corporation that writes the policy — which seems an
odd way to enforce such a policy, to say the least. Although I guess if
we\’re going back and rewriting the rules 160 years after the Late
Unpleasantness, why not write in such a remedy while we\’re at it?
I still don\’t know what \”nunc pro tunc\” has to do with anything. Courts
certainly have inherent power to enter an order today with retroactive
effect, but it\’s usually used for things like correcting ministerial
mistakes, or putting parties in the status quo ante when they\’ve been
put out of it by a judgment that\’s been reversed, etc. Using it to go
back and \”correct history\” like this would just be unprecedented. And
one would hope the judge would be smart enough to realize that creating
a humanitarian trust fund would just be shifting money from the
stockholders of a bunch of corporations to some bureaucrats who\’ll use
it to agitate further for their cause.
But hey, there\’s nothing a white male Reagan appointee like Judge Norgle
(the district court judge who\’s thrown this case out twice now) can do.
He\’s a tool of the White Male Hetero Patriarchy, dontcha know.
Forrest Gump,
I\’m sure the Judge would resent being called a \”tool\” of anyone, anything.
Are you a liberal tool, or did you and your atty friend just sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night?
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.
How can you say that there are no merits to this case after reading a 4 or 5 paragraph description on an insurance news site? Have you read all the depositions, gone through all the evidence?
Or are you making a judgement based on feeling and instinct, both of which aren\’t valid legal arguments?
Scott, even though I\’m skeptical of the case, at least I\’m smart enough not to make a proclamation regarding its merits. You\’re the one looking like the fool.
Ok, I\’m a fool. Let\’s just see how the case turns out. I may be a fool but I bet I\’m right. This case is absurd and has no merit.
I can\’t help but reply after reading Realist\’s message:
People like bunny can not help themselves, they are like sheep that follow the herd and have the herd (PC) mentality. They can not and will not think for themselves. They are quick to scream racism but do not see how hypocritical they are by screaming an \”ism\”. It\’s sad.
Excuse me, but you do not know me and your judgment of me is completely wrong. This should not be a place for personal attacks and that is certainly not what I intended in my earlier message. I made an observation based on what I had read here. While I was not screaming, I do think we all need to be very careful so that nothing we do is racist. Sometimes we fail this even when we are well-intentioned. I work long, hard hours for humanitarian organizations to ensure peace can be experienced by more people. Realist, your remarks were totally off-base.
So let me get this straight: The argument is that the right to be free from enslavement came first, presumably from God, and therefore slavery was illegal even though it was legal. Is that it?
Of course, some goofy judge might see the merit of such an outrageous concept trumping ex post facto prohibitions, but it is obvious that you are fishing about for something other than the Constitution and normally accepted western legal concepts to get money for nothing from corporations that would rather settle out of court than go to trial.
Judges these days quote the laws of other countries and treaties that we haven\’t signed as bases for their stupid rulings. No doubt one could be found who would do so if this gets to trial in order to assuage his guilty conscience over things his ancestors might have done.
I\’m going to do something I\’ve always wanted to do: our geneology. Maybe I can find somebody who fits the \”one drop rule\” in the family tree, and I can cash in too!
Good post Jackie. Give it to them. Plus the OJ trial was a great point about \”justice\” and \”black justice\” which, AS WE ALL KNOW, is not the same.
I am fascinated by the emotions this article evoked. Just thought I\’d point out that the 7th Circuit is hearing oral argument of the appeal (by plaintiffs) of the DISMISSAL of their case by the US District court judge (Norgle) in July 2005. Here\’s a blurb from the Chicago Sun Times dated July 6, 2005:
\”A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by slave descendants seeking reparations from corporations that benefitted from slave labor — the end of the line in U.S. District Court.
U.S. District Judge Charles R. Norgle said slavery has caused \”tremendous suffering and ineliminable scars,\” but an attempt to seek reparations \”more than a century after the end of the Civil War and the formal abolition of slavery fails.\”
Norgle said plaintiffs in the case did not prove they were personally injured by slavery, adding that a genealogical tie to slaves is not enough to show that injury. Norgle said the plaintiffs failed to show any \”concrete and particular\” suffering that wasn\’t true of African Americans in general. Those suing failed to allege any conduct by the 18 defendants that individually affected any of the plaintiffs, he said.
Norgle also cited long-standing legal doctrine barring the courts from deciding reparations.
It\’s a decision up to the president and Congress to make, he said.
The lawsuit, filed in 2002, sought to hold 18 corporations liable for their reaping benefits from slave labor before, during and after the Civil War.\”
On September 27, 2006, the 7th Circuit will hear arguments on plaintiffs have appeal of the dismissal of their case. Seems to me to be an issue for Congress – & is very much a valid issue for the public discourse.
You may be interested in Wikipedia\’s synopsis of the history of this issue generally –
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reparations_for_slavery
A lot of bad things happened to people of all backgrounds in the development of this country, and no one should ever minimize how horrid and what a national embarrassment slavery was. Lest we never forget, as the Holocaust survivors say….works here just as well. And the world learns….
It\’s like these folks just WANT to keep the thorn in their side because if they remove and let go of the pain they wouldn\’t know what to do with themselves. We all know people who just thrive on anger because they just can\’t figure out that happiness is a state of mind they can CHOOSE for themselves. Argument for the sake of the argument is not a valid argument. Repeat after me: Frivolous Lawsuit only costs, never gains.
Perhaps a better approach for these plaintiffs would be to start some educational program to better our country\’s understanding of the past instead of costing all of us in the end. What did I ever do to deserve having to pay (and we all will) for a lawsuit for things that happened when my ancestors were still in Ireland, Germany and Norway?? What the heck is fair about that?? My uncle\’s merchant ship was sunk by the Germans in WWII. Should I bring suit against the Germans for unrealized income and loss of those lives? How ridiculous!!
I have 3 words for these pathetic people….GET A LIFE. The American Blacks (and a lot of other people, myself included) of the 40\’s, 50\’s and 60\’s worked so hard to attain equality for all citizens in this country, regardless of race. I have no doubt their hard working ancestors would roll over in their graves if they knew they were perpetuating such hatred, not based on race or ethnicity, but rather on STUPIDITY AND GREED!
I asked an attorney friend for his take on this matter, and his remarks follow verbatim:
So how does that mean the insurance company is liable?
At least with the railroad conglomerates (which are corporate successors
in interest to the railroad companies that used slave labor in the 1840s
and 1850s), I understand the argument; those railroad companies took
your great-great-grandfather\’s labor without paying him for it, his heir
should have a right to recover against the railroad company\’s successor.
(Of course, that ignores that the plaintiffs in this suit are asking for
the creation of a humanitarian trust fund, not any actual damages for
Company X harming Individual Y, plus 160 years of interest.)
I suppose you\’d need to argue that there\’s some current statutory
prohibition on taking out life insurance policies on other people
without their consent — which there may well be, for all I know — and
that the statutory remedy is that the insured person can recover
something from the corporation that writes the policy — which seems an
odd way to enforce such a policy, to say the least. Although I guess if
we\’re going back and rewriting the rules 160 years after the Late
Unpleasantness, why not write in such a remedy while we\’re at it?
I still don\’t know what \”nunc pro tunc\” has to do with anything. Courts
certainly have inherent power to enter an order today with retroactive
effect, but it\’s usually used for things like correcting ministerial
mistakes, or putting parties in the status quo ante when they\’ve been
put out of it by a judgment that\’s been reversed, etc. Using it to go
back and \”correct history\” like this would just be unprecedented. And
one would hope the judge would be smart enough to realize that creating
a humanitarian trust fund would just be shifting money from the
stockholders of a bunch of corporations to some bureaucrats who\’ll use
it to agitate further for their cause.
But hey, there\’s nothing a white male Reagan appointee like Judge Norgle
(the district court judge who\’s thrown this case out twice now) can do.
He\’s a tool of the White Male Hetero Patriarchy, dontcha know.
Forrest Gump,
I\’m sure the Judge would resent being called a \”tool\” of anyone, anything.
Are you a liberal tool, or did you and your atty friend just sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night?
\”Are you a liberal tool, or did you and your atty friend just sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night?\”
I\’m not a doctor, but I played one on TV….
He was being sarcastic, O Southern One. He\’s to the right of me, and I\’m to the right of Thomas Jefferson, so chill.
[[Is everyone as sick as I am of being blown out of the page for not being able to decipher the illegible anti-spam image?]]