TEXT ONLY ORDER denying Plaintiffs’ request for a hearing on their Motions to Amend and to Expedite. The Court, in its discretion, does not find that oral argument would be necessary or helpful in deciding the Motions. Pursuant to Uniform Local Rule 7.2(F)(1), the Court shall decide Plaintiffs’ Motions without a hearing or oral argument. NO FURTHER WRITTEN ORDER WILL ISSUE FROM THE COURT REGARDING THIS REQUEST. Signed by District Judge Halil S. Ozerden on 9/2/2009. (EMN) (Entered: 09/02/2009)
Oh, no-one knows what goes on behind closed doors. Behind closed doors.
The next day, Judge Ozerden issued an Order granting in-part O’Keefe’s Motion to file an amended complaint. O’Keefes counsel, Christopher Van Cleave, was sitting on ready and the day after Ozerden’s Order issued, he filed a Motion to Alter or Amend the Findings and/or Judgment of the Court; for a New Trial on and/or Seeking Relief from the Court’s Order...
First, a look at the Order – and be sure to read the feeling is Mutual – and so is the fact for background on the issue and a look at the chart showing the relationship of State Farm Mutual to State Farm Fire.
…the Court is of the opinion that Plaintiffs’ Motion should be granted to the extent that it seeks to amend Plaintiffs’ claims against the existing Defendants in this case.
The remaining question is whether Plaintiffs should be permitted to amend their Complaint to add an additional Defendant, State Farm Mutual. State Farm Fire maintains…that allowing Plaintiffs to amend their Complaint to add this Defendant would result in undue delay and would be futile.
Obviously, behind closed doors, Ozerden directed his attention to State Farm’s claims of futility. The irony was lost and he included a relatively lengthy discussion of futility in his Order before toeing the parte line: Continue reading “no one knows what goes on behind closed doors but O’Keefe wants to open the door to State Farm Mutual and find out!”
With the notable exception of MR-GO, nothing about Hurricane Katrina should be sealed; yet, State Farm has sealed so many Katrina litigation documents, the Company is the hands down winner of the “Duck tape saves the day contest“.
Y’allPolitics.com took a step in the right direction today with this announcement:
Jackson New Media, Inc., publisher of the political interest website YallPolitics.com, has filed to intervene in the 2007 federal court case of State Farm Insurance vs. Attorney General Jim Hood…
Jackson New Media attorney Andy Taggart stated, “Hundreds of thousands of Mississippians were adversely affected by Hurricane Katrina. This was a watershed piece of litigation that tens of thousands of homeowners and all Mississippi taxpayers have a stake in. All we ask from the Court is to allow the press and the public their First Amendment right to access to relevant court materials and remove the lingering doubts as to what really happened in this matter.”
You know you look so good,
You got me going now.
The public’s First Amendment right to access relevant court materials does not begin and end with State Farm v Hood. Continue reading “Shake it up baby, come on, come on, come on and work it ALL out – not just Hood and State Farm”
If you recall the recent post no disaster assistance for broken dreams, you may also remember the cases discussed in the post were about replacement cost coverage. Fowler v State Farm also had replacement cost coverage as an issue.
Replacement cost is the amount it would take to replace or rebuild your home or repair damages with material of similar kind and quality, without deducting for depreciation.
Let’s take a closer look at how the issue emerged in the Motion in limine to Preclude Evidence of or Reference to Replacement Cost of Dwelling in Fowler’s case.
Defendant State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (“State Farm”) hereby moves this Court for an in limine order excluding any evidence, testimony, or argument relating or referring to the amount it would cost to replace or rebuild Plaintiffs’ Pass Christian vacation home. As set forth in the accompanying Memorandum of Law, Plaintiffs’ homeowners policy provides that Plaintiffs may recover replacement cost – i.e., the amount actually expended to repair or replace their dwelling (subject to specified limitations) – only “when the repair or replacement is actually completed.” Continue reading “Replacement cost coverage – easy to say but does it pay?”
Other than the add-on that keeps bright blue text below the surface (usually), SLABBED is pretty much a “standard package” with the capacity to collect data on a fairly basic set indicators.
Our data come without the context needed for us to know much more than someone is reading; and, as long as we know that, we are content taken’ it as it comes. However, I do confess to having occasional thoughts about those who come at times and from places where most are sleeping, most often wondering if they’re burdened but fearful.
I’ve thought more about those with sleepless nights since reading the Insurance Adjuster’s Dilemma: Tell the Truth and Face the Consequences by Raising Claim Practice Misconduct
The classic example is the civil prosecution of the Rigsby sisters. They told a story of a State Farm adjuster holding numerous reports which were not being sent to policyholders but were “revised.” The revised reports were always worse for the policyholders because they allowed for State Farm to deny claims. Had their story stopped there, they would have been terminated. But their actions went further with Dickie Scruggs, and the rest has been fodder for demeaning posts by the insurance industry.
When Katrina’s music stops playing this song, there will be a player without a chair – and, who that might be is something I’ve thought more about since reading about the arrangement between the WYO companies and FEMA. Continue reading “When Katrina’s music stops – the player without a chair”