In response to the re-run of our archival post not to belabor the point, which originally ran on April 7, 2009 a reader sent in some observations referring us to documents we already linked which gives us the correct flood level at the McIntosh property. I actually did the research on the official flood levels for a companion post to the original (which never ran) so I am happy for the steer, especially since we had all the data.
Before we get to the pictures it and the original text of the post (as corrected) it would help to revisit with State Farm’s own experts, a dubious lot as a whole that often has trouble keeping their lies straight. In particular we are going to focus on one “rent-a-doc” in University of Florida Engineering professor Robert G Dean. It is with Dr Dean’s own report, which we linked originally in this post that we begin:
As seen in this figure, the elevation of the McIntosh property is approximately 14 feet. Menhennett (2007) conducted a survey at the McIntosh property and found that the adjacent ground elevation ranged between 12.5 ft and 15.4 ft, the top of the bottom floor of the residence was 16.5 ft and the slab of the connected garage was 14 ft. Figure 4 presents the FEMA-developed Advisory Base Flood Elevations and any High Water Marks (HWMs) in the general vicinity. Two HWMs are identified in Figure 4 and adjacent charts that are in reasonable close proximity to the McIntosh residence and their elevations as determined by survey and other characteristics are summarized in Table 2.
Dean’s choice of watermarks is interesting as one of the official measurements was taken literally within feet of the McIntosh property which in my mind makes his second choice, from over a mile to the south irrelevant. Already having one data point, which is the elevation of the McIntosh house at the top of their slab, all it takes is a trip down Dr Dean report to the official watermark measurements to find the flood level on the ground at water mark reference KMSC-02-21 was 18.6 feet which means there was 2.1 feet of water on the outside of the McIntosh residence above their slab. That is important because it would include any wave action. I am told the proper forensic engineering technique is to take inside water mark measurements. You won’t see any such reference to that data point in Dr Dean’s report. With that point made here is the text of the original post as corrected.
….Pictures are truly worth 1000 words. For instance take these from our archives of the McIntosh residence which is one of the focal points in the False Claims Act lawsuit against State Farm. There was around 4 2 feet of water inside the residence when the storm surge peaked in the Biloxi Bay several hours after Hurricane force winds began blowing.
Remember the neighbors said the house next door blew apart and into the McIntosh residence which in turn breached its structural integrity. I wonder whose roof trusses are in the picture? The McIntosh residence still has its roof and there is no house between them and the water. Continue reading “USA Ex Rel Rigsby v State Farm: An analysis of the McIntosh Claim: Updating the original post Not to belabor the point”
But pictures are truly worth 1000 words. For instance take these from our archives of the McIntosh residence which is one of the focal points in the False Claims Act lawsuit against State Farm. There was around 4 feet of water inside the residence when the storm surge peaked in the Biloxi Bay several hours after Hurricane force winds began blowing.
Remember the neighbors said the house next door blew apart and into the McIntosh residence which in turn breached its structural integrity. I wonder whose roof trusses are in the picture? The McIntosh residence still has its roof and there is no house between them and the water. Continue reading “Not to Belabor the Point…..”
It seemed this personal perspective on qui tam that I wrote for Katrina’s 3rd was a fitting introduction for a post letting the rest of we the people know that the Rigsbys legal team honored us all with their response to the first set of dispositive motions filed by State Farm.
qui tam translates to [he] who sues for the King and himself. In our country…We the people are King; and, our homes – humble, grand, or Katrina cottage – our castles. The proper title of the Katrina qui tam case would be Nowdy, Sop, Belle… ex rel Rigsby. Of course, it would have to include another 300 million plus names and that’s just not possible.
Consequently, we the people are presented by the single name USA.
Not only did the Rigsbys’ counsel honor all of us, they honored Judge Senter as well. They filed their Response with State Farm still holding all of the documents they requested through normal channels of discovery – holding on even after the Rigsbys’ counsel filed an emergency motion with a scaled down the set of documents requested!
Class versus Crass
If you recall, there were three sets of dispositive motions detailed in this earlier post. This Response is to the first set that seeks to dismiss the qui tam claim on the basis of lack of jurisdiction. One of the three statutory requirements related to jurisdiction is that the Relators must be an original source of the information provided the government.
Can you imagine having to make that case with the information still in State Farm’s possession? Continue reading “Class versus Crass – Rigsbys legal team responds to State Farm's 1st set of dispositive motions”
…If this case [Renfroe v Rigsby] goes to trial on this schedule with no amendment and no counterclaim, which would cover that, and this[Qui Tam] case reaches a conclusion by dispositive order and is entered, it will preclude anything —
Now, that’s just my’ free legal advice, because I can’t control what another judge does in another case. But I can give you some free legal advice on both sides, that the first one of those cases that gets to trial and resolves the question of who did what to whom as between the Rigsbys and Renfroe — Now, let me add this dimension…
…I predict that unless you, not I, because I can’t — I’m not calling the judge down in Mississippi and begging for him to transfer something to me. But if he, whoever it is, that’s got that case down there, the qui tam case, manages it or mismanages it, whatever, by the time that case is over, this case will have already been over. And this case will control the outcome of the retaliation claim down there one way or the other.
Yep, the mad-as-a-hatter Judge Acker really said that – and here’s more of what he said during the Status Conference on Renfroe v Rigsby he held on August 29, 2007 Continue reading “Acker threatened Rigsby Qui Tam with “free legal advice” almost a year ago”