Hood accused State Farm of reporting false statistics, saying the insurer asserted it had settled 99 percent of its Katrina claims. The Attorney General said if the insurer considered a residence damaged by water, it didn’t consider it a claim at all. He also accused the company of withholding claimants’ complete files.
“They agreed and the state court ordered them to give insureds their entire claims file. One adjuster would say to pay and another would say not to pay,” Hood said. “State Farm knew there were two reports and they were sitting on them. I think that’s awful.”
reports prior to the issuance of Haag’s “Hurricane Katrina Storm Damage Survey” issued in. October 2005. …… FAEC Case No: 530-0088-05-25. Dear Mr; Perr. … http://agjimhood.com/pressreleases
Hang on… the lawers are fighting over the privelage to represent these poor, poor people that Bush has so viciously attacked? Wow, that’s pretty noble of them.
Oh, wait… what’s that…
Oh, they’re fighting over money. But I thought this wasn’t about lawers getting rich it was about justice for the homeowners against the big-bad insurance companies. Hmmm…
A contract is a contract. This wasn’t fine print and it was approved by regulators. And I don’t know of any insurer that does not have the concurrent loss language. However, I think they may apply it differently to essentially say it does not make the uncovered, covered. Won’t matter; State Farm with the majority of insureds and the questioned practices, in they end may have no obligation to pay.
As for why someone would bribe, one the cases aren’t all going Scrubbs way. In fact, even with politics on his side he has lost. However, greed + lack of ethics is almost always the reason for a bribe. Innocent until proven guilty? Well, that really for the judicial system and jurors. The general public is free to have it’s opinion. Don’t people believe Spector and Simpson to be guilty of crimes where they were never convicted?
Individuals lose their homes every day to things they can’t control or things they could have. Neighbor’s fire spreads to theirs. Meth lab next door. Water line breaks while they’re not at home and goes a week without being discovered.
This argument of natural or manmade in the LA is a veiled attempt to find coverage for the victims of Katrina where there was no coverage and to make an industry pay for a disaster where they never collected premiums. If not for Katrina, these people would still have their homes. If not for Katrina, the levees would not have failed. Bottom line: that makes this a natural disaster.
I feel sorry for anyone who loses their home but I feel less sorry for someone who has built their home below sea level, been warned and still wants to built it back at the nation’s expense. For all of the money spent in New Orleans and LA in the last 27 months or so, we could have built a nice new city for these folks. But they want to continue to live in the next Atlantis. We say that’s their right. But pardon me if I resent paying for it.
i think everyone forgets a few things about certain items. first and foremost, the tobacco suit should have included the US Gov’t. reason, they had the combination to cigarettes for years held in a locked vault. THEY KNEW (congress) for years it was bad and the product was labeled as such. So, why was just the tobacco company held liable? why not the US Government as well? so did scruggs not want to mess w/the us government becuase of TRENT?! um..um..um…… sounds like a big circle…
another note: if we sued the cigarette company — why have we not done that with the alcohol industry? reason we sued was due to health related and costs, can’t alcohol cause medical/health related issues? is it not addictive? so why did we make a big issue on tobacco?
interesting…and scruggs was apart of the big $$$ tobacco deal…so he’s got money and then wanted to fight over the money on the katrina issue…um…
Just read Dickie’s quote on the opening pages of the ATRA’s 2006 report on Judicial Hellholes.
“What I call the ‘magic jurisdiction,’ [is] where the judiciary is elected with
verdict money. The trial lawyers have established relationships with the
judges that are elected; they’re State Court judges; they’re popul[ists].
They’ve got large populations of voters who are in on the deal, they’re
getting their [piece] in many cases. And so, it’s a political force in their
jurisdiction, and it’s almost impossible to get a fair trial if you’re a
defendant in some of these places. The plaintiff lawyer walks in there and
writes the number on the blackboard, and the fi rst juror meets the last one
coming out the door with that amount of money. . . . These cases are not
won in the courtroom. They’re won on the back roads long before the case
goes to trial. Any lawyer fresh out of law school can walk in there and win
the case, so it doesn’t matter what the evidence or law is.”
— Richard “Dickie” Scruggs, Mississippi trial lawyer, whose firm will collect $1.4 billion in legal fees from the tobacco settlements and has now shifted his focus to lawsuits against HMOs and asbestos claims.
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.
Hood accused State Farm of reporting false statistics, saying the insurer asserted it had settled 99 percent of its Katrina claims. The Attorney General said if the insurer considered a residence damaged by water, it didn’t consider it a claim at all. He also accused the company of withholding claimants’ complete files.
“They agreed and the state court ordered them to give insureds their entire claims file. One adjuster would say to pay and another would say not to pay,” Hood said. “State Farm knew there were two reports and they were sitting on them. I think that’s awful.”
reports prior to the issuance of Haag’s “Hurricane Katrina Storm Damage Survey” issued in. October 2005. …… FAEC Case No: 530-0088-05-25. Dear Mr; Perr. …
http://agjimhood.com/pressreleases
Read this one … FAEC Case No ; 530-0088-05-25
Hang on… the lawers are fighting over the privelage to represent these poor, poor people that Bush has so viciously attacked? Wow, that’s pretty noble of them.
Oh, wait… what’s that…
Oh, they’re fighting over money. But I thought this wasn’t about lawers getting rich it was about justice for the homeowners against the big-bad insurance companies. Hmmm…
A contract is a contract. This wasn’t fine print and it was approved by regulators. And I don’t know of any insurer that does not have the concurrent loss language. However, I think they may apply it differently to essentially say it does not make the uncovered, covered. Won’t matter; State Farm with the majority of insureds and the questioned practices, in they end may have no obligation to pay.
As for why someone would bribe, one the cases aren’t all going Scrubbs way. In fact, even with politics on his side he has lost. However, greed + lack of ethics is almost always the reason for a bribe. Innocent until proven guilty? Well, that really for the judicial system and jurors. The general public is free to have it’s opinion. Don’t people believe Spector and Simpson to be guilty of crimes where they were never convicted?
Individuals lose their homes every day to things they can’t control or things they could have. Neighbor’s fire spreads to theirs. Meth lab next door. Water line breaks while they’re not at home and goes a week without being discovered.
This argument of natural or manmade in the LA is a veiled attempt to find coverage for the victims of Katrina where there was no coverage and to make an industry pay for a disaster where they never collected premiums. If not for Katrina, these people would still have their homes. If not for Katrina, the levees would not have failed. Bottom line: that makes this a natural disaster.
I feel sorry for anyone who loses their home but I feel less sorry for someone who has built their home below sea level, been warned and still wants to built it back at the nation’s expense. For all of the money spent in New Orleans and LA in the last 27 months or so, we could have built a nice new city for these folks. But they want to continue to live in the next Atlantis. We say that’s their right. But pardon me if I resent paying for it.
Be angry that the schools failed you.
i think everyone forgets a few things about certain items. first and foremost, the tobacco suit should have included the US Gov’t. reason, they had the combination to cigarettes for years held in a locked vault. THEY KNEW (congress) for years it was bad and the product was labeled as such. So, why was just the tobacco company held liable? why not the US Government as well? so did scruggs not want to mess w/the us government becuase of TRENT?! um..um..um…… sounds like a big circle…
another note: if we sued the cigarette company — why have we not done that with the alcohol industry? reason we sued was due to health related and costs, can’t alcohol cause medical/health related issues? is it not addictive? so why did we make a big issue on tobacco?
interesting…and scruggs was apart of the big $$$ tobacco deal…so he’s got money and then wanted to fight over the money on the katrina issue…um…
Just read Dickie’s quote on the opening pages of the ATRA’s 2006 report on Judicial Hellholes.
“What I call the ‘magic jurisdiction,’ [is] where the judiciary is elected with
verdict money. The trial lawyers have established relationships with the
judges that are elected; they’re State Court judges; they’re popul[ists].
They’ve got large populations of voters who are in on the deal, they’re
getting their [piece] in many cases. And so, it’s a political force in their
jurisdiction, and it’s almost impossible to get a fair trial if you’re a
defendant in some of these places. The plaintiff lawyer walks in there and
writes the number on the blackboard, and the fi rst juror meets the last one
coming out the door with that amount of money. . . . These cases are not
won in the courtroom. They’re won on the back roads long before the case
goes to trial. Any lawyer fresh out of law school can walk in there and win
the case, so it doesn’t matter what the evidence or law is.”
— Richard “Dickie” Scruggs, Mississippi trial lawyer, whose firm will collect $1.4 billion in legal fees from the tobacco settlements and has now shifted his focus to lawsuits against HMOs and asbestos claims.
There’s just no honor among thieves, is there?