Judge Senter doesn’t seem amused by the jackassery of State Farm’s Oxford Mississippi based lawyers Scot Spragins and Lucky Tucker of Hickman, Goza and Spragins.
What we’ve found on slabbed is that some lawyers and law firms will do anything to stay on the insurance defense money train. It is our hope that the Kuehn’s lawyer will re-file motions to have the dysfunctional duo booted from the case as they are witnesses to an extraordinary act of insurance bad faith. Our readers will no doubt recall the original motion was dismissed without prejudice, meaning it could be brought back up when the moment was right.
The folks at the Denham law firm have done a tremendous job beclowning Spragins and Tucker while simultaneously laying bare State Farm’s sleazy methods of cheating their homeless policyholders:
Minor testified he found Tucker’s instructions confusing and inconsistent with his (Minor’s) understanding of his responsibilities as an appraiser. Minor’s confusion and uncertainty concerning Tucker’s instructions were sufficient to prompt him to ask that Tucker either provide his instructions in writing or furnish a modified court order reflecting those instructions. Tucker declined Minor’s request for either of these forms of clarification. Although Tucker attended the evidentiary hearing, he did not take the witness stand to clarify or contradict what Minor had to say about their conversation.
Minor’s dissatisfaction was such that he asked Tucker to hire another appraiser and relieve him (Minor) of his responsibilities in this case. Tucker refused this request. Minor turned to Land and to other State Farm representatives for assistance in understanding his instructions, and Minor ultimately came away with the understanding he was to follow his ordinary practices in performing this appraisal. Minor testified that is exactly what he did.
After meeting together to discuss the damage they observed during the joint inspection of the plaintiffs’ residence, the members of the panel, at Minor’s instance, agreed all damage below the water line on the second floor would be excluded from consideration in the appraisal. The plaintiffs contended some of the damage below the Case 1:08-cv-00577-LTS-RHW Document 85 Filed 08/17/2009 Page 4 of 10 water line was attributable to covered wind and rain damage rather than exclusively to flooding, but plaintiffs’ representative, O’Leary, nevertheless agreed to exclude this damage from consideration. After discussing the damages they observed above the second-story water line, Minor, O’Leary, and Voelpel unanimously agreed the total covered loss was $174,881.80. The three members of the panel all signed a report reflecting this conclusion…….. Continue reading “Well here is another nice mess you’ve gotten me into Part Deux: Judge Senter lowers the boom on the topic of State Farm’s cancerous Katrina claims handling. Slabbed Congratulates Henry and June Kuehn”