Here is a nugget for you team insurance freaks.
There is talk that Team Branch may appeal Judge Vance’s latest ruling as rumors of a malpractice suit swirl around Allan Kanner, the “Show me the money” man whose balls Judge Vance busted earlier this week. Nowdy assures me that Judge Vance has a few flaws in her reasoning but it is her opinion Judge Vance got the procedural problems with Branch right.
For my part I sense a budding soap opera in the making.
sop
There is an interesting “dangling participle” in Vance’s opining involving an apparent “pissing contest” between Mr. Kanner (who incidentally has a “stellar” resume’) and one of Letten’s underlings, an Assistant U.S. Attorney named Sharon D. Smith (although Vance – or the law clerk who wrote the opining – refers to Smith at one point as “Sharon Stone”). The issue, on which Vance “punted”, not deciding the issue, but avoiding it on other grounds, revolved around Mr. Kanner’s claim that he had made timely written disclosure to the Government, through Smith, prior to filing the original Complaint. I don’t have access to PACER, so have been unable to view the relevant papers, but Smith appears to have disagreed. This means, of course, that either Mr. Kanner or Smith LIED and committed “fraud upon the Court”. If I were a betting man, I would place my money on Mr. Kanner’s integrity and veracity, and call Smith the LIAR. Following in the footsteps of so many of her felonious colleagues. Ashton O’Dwyer a/k/a “The WHITE Henry Glover”.
What page is that on Ashton? Good catch, by the way. Thanks.
True story about Kanner: During a colleague’s oral argument in Chauvin regarding why the 5th Circuit should certify the issue to the La. Supreme Ct., Ralph Hubbard, counsel for Travelers, responded that Kanner’s case (a great case with a great trial court ruling and a great La. 4th Circuit panel) could settle so why certify the VPL issue to the La. Supreme Ct. Of course, a few days later we learned the case settled.
Several months later I approached Kanner at a CLE about trying Hurricane cases as I my colleague and I had just tried one in St. Bernard. I also was a bit perplexed that he settled his VPL case as it was set up perfectly on the legal issues. Kanner’s reponse was “its just easier to settle to hurricane cases.”
Nuff said.
Nowdy: It’s at pages 41 – 42. It appears again at page 48 where Assistant U.S. Attorney “Sharon Smith” is erroneously referred to by Vance (and/or the lawclerk who wrote the opinion) as “Sharon Stone”. AROD.