Western La District Court Finds a Way to Short Circuit the Fifth Circuit?

This actually makes too much sense to hold up but who knows. Thanks to our friends on the Cameron Parish School Board ordinary people won a very important battle against big insurance. Our readers no doubt recall how the 5th Circuit slaughtered the concept of anti concurrent causation in Leonard v Nationwide while ruling the policy clause was not ambigious.

In a case with fact patterns evidently very similar to the Mississippi case Broussard v State Farm the Federal District court has ruled out self serving after the fact experts for insurers:

This inquiry is factual. RSUI relies upon Nelson’s adjustment to justify its failure to pay. Nelson did not begin adjusting until August 2007. CPSB filed suit in September 2006, and thus RSUI cannot now rely on Nelson’s reports to justity its failure to pay prior to August 2007 because whether an action is arbitrary, capricious, or without probable cause depends on the facts known to the insurer at the time of its action.

Bottom line is insurers have a duty to adjust their claims. Using logic only a lawyer would appreciate RSUI actually argued Continue reading “Western La District Court Finds a Way to Short Circuit the Fifth Circuit?”

Renfroe files rebuttal in qui tam case – should have filed a flight plan!

Pacer offered Renefroe’s Rebuttal to the Response in opposition to summary judgment as the Friday night special – and, starting with a tailspin of an introduction, it takes off in so many directions they should have filed a flight plan,

After reading it over a couple of times and doing some background research, I sat it aside until tonight to see if it would fly when I read it again.  Didn’t happen.  So, we’re going to walk but start with the five-count amended Complaint filed in May 2007 and move forward from there to the Rebuttal.

This past May, Renfroe filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on the first four counts.

…the Relators’ claims fall within the category of claims prohibited under 31 U.S.C. § 3730(e)(4) this Court lacks jurisdiction over Counts I through IV of the First Amended Complaint, and these claims must be dismissed with prejudice. Continue reading “Renfroe files rebuttal in qui tam case – should have filed a flight plan!”