I’ll keep this short and sweet folks as time is scarce for me today but we’re getting some referrals from a Joe Nocera column in the New York Times today about Judge Barbier’s recent fee ruling in the Oil Spill MDL and that also allows me to link Becky Mowbray’s reporting for the Times Picayune on Buddy Caldwell’s appeal of Judge Barbier’s ruling, which we covered here in a post that has been very well received in the new media. For my part I’m still cataloguing various instances where lawyers sitting on the PSC that also represent other clients against BP outside the PSC are taking diametrically opposing positions on the fee arrangement in motions filed before Judge Barbier’s court. This in turn lends the whole affair a three ring circus like quality.
Nocera, as is his wont, takes the side of corporate america, namely BP, in his piece but misses the mark by leaving out the fact that BP is an active participant in the cesspool that is this litigation even hiring the plaintiff firm that bears the name of legendary trial lawyer Wendell Gauthier to hand out campaign cash to local “luminaries” such as Bobby Jindal and Mary Landrieu. Nocera is what he is folks and his column is otherwise very accurate, well sourced and this much is true, BP has opened its wallet to make amends.
Becky Mowbray OTOH wrote the column that needed writing as she lent some much needed context to the political environment that got us here. Becky points out that Buddy Caldwell went to the legislature to obtain contingent fee authority from the legislature to pay the state’s contract lawyers in the MDL and was denied by same. She also honed in on the fact that the lawyer representing Team Jindal, Burton LeBlanc’s law firm, Baron & Budd sits on the PSC meaning Team Jindal has potentially interest conflicted council. The report had everything but Caldwell’s appeal itself, which a reader was kind enough to share so everyone could read the entire 56 page document for themselves.
I’ll have more on this down the line as the legal conflicts of interest are open, brazen and have amazingly been allowed to this point by Judge Barbier.
sop
I'm still fighting my own "demons", on a daily basis (I call it a "Reigh of Terror" that was loosed on me in September 2005, and continues), but what I find so interesting is the "pissing contest" between Jindal, who is (with the advocacy of his obviously conflicted lawyers Baron & Budd) in favor of the 4% set aside for legal fees, and Caldwell who is against the set-aside and recently filed a Writ of Mandamus to the Fifth "Circus". Caldwell filed his Writ as Attorney General notwithstanding Jindal's having already signed a document in which he warranted, as the Chief Executive Officer of the State, that the State would NOT appeal Barbier's summary Order establishing the set-aside! So instead of looking at the political contributions of some of BP's lawyers to Mary Landrieu (SPIT!) and Jindal (SPIT!), maybe "The SLABBED Nation" should be looking at the political contributions by Members of the Plaintiffs' Steering Committee to Jindal. I believe that most, if not all, of the Members of the PSC are identified in Caldwell's Writ of Mandamus, at the beginning of the document, identified as "Interested Persons". Ashton O'Dwyer.
Y'all seen Warren Buffett's e-mail yet? It is making the rounds. His hope is to reach everyone within three days.
He is proposing no pensions for congress people, congress people having to abide by the laws they put on the citizenry, their big fat pension plans and I guess health care going into the same Social Security and health system everyone else is stuck with, and so on.
His suggestions struck me as sensible, and about as non-partisan as you can be in an era of voluntary and willful hardheartedness towards the voices and perspectives of those whose opinions differ.
Leaving aside the particulars, I read his e-mail, forwarded to me by a friend, then directly read this story about politicians from both teams taking donations from the shadowy men with no names. The contrast in the sensibility was remarkable. Buffett and all the ordinary people forwarding this thing around vs. the sleaze machine.
As with so many things in life, the honest, loving amateur is better than the souless pro.
I have to say Nocera has hit 1 nail on the head – like it or not, Obama made a 20 billion recovery for BP victims.
Now, the PSC wants a part of that recovery, and part of the State's recovery, because they will never recover nearly that much on their own representing individual claimants in litigation.
Anono Warren Buffet is a double edge sword here on Slabbed. He talks a good game on isssues important to the political left but the way he makes his money in the global reinsurance biz is head scratching at times.
Back in our younger days here at the Do Slabb Inn we had a special suite called "the Warren" which we reserved for those about to enter our little house of cyber-pain. I caused a bit of a stir for suggesting that even Berkshire Hathaway had bankruptcy potential back when the financial system was unraveling.
Back on topic Nocera caters to his New York market with his columns. The GCCF is its own disaster but you'll never see anything but wet kisses for Feinberg at the NYT. Easy claims got showered with money while larger more complex business claims have dragged on and on. While I do not begrudge a waiter at a seafood restaurant a check to cover lost wages etc having a business to provide that job is more important to society as a whole. There is no good reason complicated claims should take so long yet examples of just that are legion in the local new and traditional media.
And seeing Danny Becnel buzzing around like a fly circling a piece of shit is the frosting on top.
sop
Not to disagree in any way with Sop's statements about the GCCF and Feinberg but, assuming a class action settlement of some kind is confected, spill victims will be treated no better.
Take a look at any class action settlement and you will see the victims are never told how much their individual claim is worth before the settlement is approved. I know that doesn't sound plausible, but it's an actuality.
The settlement is usually approved by the court at a fairness hearing, first. Then, at a later date, individual claimants who have timely and properly filed a claim will then be sent a letter by a "claims administrator" or "special master" telling them how much they will receive.
If the claimant disagrees with his/her allocation, they can appeal to the judge who approved the settlement and appointed the administrator/special master. Sometimes they are told they risk receiving nothing if they appeal.
The really sad part about that process is these claimants are usually without counsel and are counting on representation from the class counsel (PSC). Class counsel never represents individuals in their objections/appeals of allocations.
Instead, prior to the fairness hearing, class counsel petitions the court to approve setting aside reserves for class counsel fees, class counsel costs and expense reimbursement, claims adminstration, etc. – sometimes reaching 51% or more of the total settlement funds.
Beware what you ask for.
And to my knowledge, no "Class" has ever been certified in the BP "discharge of oil" case, which makes the appointment of a "Plaintiffs' Steering Committee" and a mandatory "set-aside" perplexing to me (assuming, of course, that the litigation is ethical and "squeaky clean"). Ashton O'Dwyer.
anon, I've always said if you want to fix Medicare, Social Security, etc…make all of the congress critters, including the POTUS, play by the same rules as us unwashed masses.
There would be a huge change of attitude.
To be sure I don't get in any trouble, for those of you who may have recently joined this Slabbed Nation, I'm not an attorney and my statements above about class action settlements and allocations are based upon my personal and professional experience as a paralegal for class action attorneys, including 7 years at the Fayard law firm(s) and as a class member in class action litigation. In no way am I suggesting or recommending or practicing or providing legal advice or legal opinions.
I'm just providing facts and my personal opinions, feelings and thoughts.
NAAS – As is usually the case, the paralegal is a better source of info than the lawyer.
Yeah, Post Turtle, that was the main thing I liked about the e-mail I was sent. The sense that the elected ones should be on the plans the people who elected them are on. I've heard versions of this idea from libertarians, Tea Party people, and my nose-pierced vegetarian niece by marriage, who really is not as bad as that description makes her sound.
I'm not an expert on Warren B. or on how he makes his money, and I take the point that posters more savvy than I have some reservations.
There are many of us whose fathers had a skilled trade of some sort which supported our families well enough for at least one child, and often more than one, to attain a professional credential and the habits of life and mind that go with the sheepskin. It all seemed to be working out just fine, but as I age, I am more discombobulated by all the systems, medical, legal, insurance, etc. that I interact with, and I wish I had chosen to spend my time making beautiful furniture or fixing high end motorcycles for a living. Enduring, tangible, comprehensible examples of a job done well appeal to me.
Then I remember that had I followed my Dad, I'd still have had to deal with insurance and the rest and I sigh. Maybe I have more in common with the fools who want to return to a TV fantasy past than I like to admit.
Nothing about how the insurance system works has made a lick of sense to me since 2005. Think back with me: before then, how much did you know about your neighbor's insurance issues? Was it at all obvious to the average joe that things were as arbitrary as it seems they are?
Regarding Warren Anono, you can start here.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2007/07/23/18223/justi…
I get the urge to buy a cabin in the mountains when I have that time to drop out feeling.
But then I remember I have a blog to moderate. 😉
sop