Go Back   Literotica Discussion Board > Main Literotica Forums > Authors' Hangout

Reply
 
Thread Tools

Old 05-25-2011, 11:20 PM   #76
sr71plt
Literotica Guru
 
sr71plt's Avatar
 
sr71plt is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mid-Atlantic, USA
Posts: 34,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stella_Omega View Post
"I know you're mad as hell, but perhaps you want to investigate before you pop off, huh?
Why should he change now?
__________________
______________________
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-25-2011, 11:36 PM   #77
Boxlicker101
Licker of Boxes
 
Boxlicker101's Avatar
 
Boxlicker101 is online now
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: With my face buried in her pussy
Posts: 23,934
Apparently, Kraft had nothing to do with the contamination, which all happened over twenty years ago, and maybe more than fifty. It was done by some other company, which later became part of the Kraft corporation. Presumably, it was through merger, which would make Kraft liable. The other company brought all their liabilities and other baggage.

I don't know anything about the merits of the case. Presumably, there are some, although it could have been just a matter of Kraft settling to avoid an expensive lawsuit and a possible bigger decision against them.
__________________
100% smut or stroke, and proud of it.

The Rest of My Smut

Dirty old man.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-26-2011, 12:44 AM   #78
Stella_Omega
No Gentleman
 
Stella_Omega's Avatar
 
Stella_Omega is offline
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Shaken, not stirred
Posts: 39,514
yeah, remember the corporate raiders of the 70's and 80s? The guys who grabbed any company that couldn't get out of the way fast enough, and stuck the bits together into insane conglomerates?

I remember them.

Kraft bought the company for its profitability, they get to own the problems too.
__________________
"Oh woe, these be perilous times! Children no longer obey their elders, and everybody is writing a book!"
--Pliny the Elder, AD76

All about Stella; My AH profile
Stella's stories on lit

An essay for BDSM Newbies; Top, bottom, dominant, submissive-- and the differences thereof Now rewritten with extra sparkle!
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-26-2011, 08:32 AM   #79
trysail
Catch Me Who Can
 
trysail's Avatar
 
trysail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 'twixt here and there
Posts: 18,358


Yup, it took the plaintiffs all the way until 2009 to figure out there were those nasty "toxic vapors" from all those multi-syllabic chemicals that a jury composed of liberal arts majors can't pronounce.

Hell, there may even have been some dihydrogen monoxide! Horrors!


  Reply With Quote

Old 10-04-2011, 03:51 PM   #80
trysail
Catch Me Who Can
 
trysail's Avatar
 
trysail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 'twixt here and there
Posts: 18,358


You ( yes, you ) are paying for this; you might as well know about it while you weep.


http://www.onpointnews.com/NEWS/Gues...an-s-Pimp.html



Guest Can Sue Motel 6 Over Attack by Woman's Pimp

Quote:
A guest who paid for sex with a prostitute at a Motel 6 did not assume the risk of being attacked several hours later by the prostitute's pimp, a Pennsylvania judge has ruled in an unusual premises liability lawsuit against the motel operator.

The ruling allows Gabriel Bonilla to proceed to trial with his suit alleging that inadequate security at a Motel 6 in Washington, Pa., resulted in him being slashed with a knife from ear to throat. His attackers were two men — Trey Willis and Richard Pruden — who had been offering women for sex in a room at the motel.

Bonilla might seem to be profiting from the crime of having sex with a prostitute, U.S. District Judge David Stewart Cercone said, but he would only be barred from recovering damages from the motel if a jury found that “such activity was a substantial factor in producing his injury.”

Motel 6 Operating argued it could not liable for Bonilla's injuries because paying for sex is an illegal and “obviously dangerous activity.”

But Cercone found no “evidence to support the proposition that plaintiff knowingly assumed the risk of getting slashed or violently assaulted by paying for sex” and cited Bonilla's testimony that prostitution is legal and “normal” in his native Honduras.

“Accepting plaintiff's statements as true, the evidence indicates that plaintiff was not subjectively aware of any risks in his decision to pay Pruden $30.00 to have sex,” Cercone said in denying Motel 6's motion for summary judgment.


more...
http://www.onpointnews.com/NEWS/Gues...an-s-Pimp.html
http://www.onpointnews.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-04-2011, 04:29 PM   #81
Boxlicker101
Licker of Boxes
 
Boxlicker101's Avatar
 
Boxlicker101 is online now
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: With my face buried in her pussy
Posts: 23,934
Quote:
Originally Posted by trysail View Post


You ( yes, you ) are paying for this; you might as well know about it while you weep.


http://www.onpointnews.com/NEWS/Gues...an-s-Pimp.html



Guest Can Sue Motel 6 Over Attack by Woman's Pimp



http://www.onpointnews.com/
Apparently ignorance of the law IS an excuse, at least for the plaintiff in this case.

According to this, prostitution is not all that "normal" in Honduras.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_Honduras

Personally, I think it should be legal everywhere, and things like this wouldn't happen.
__________________
100% smut or stroke, and proud of it.

The Rest of My Smut

Dirty old man.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-08-2012, 09:25 AM   #82
trysail
Catch Me Who Can
 
trysail's Avatar
 
trysail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 'twixt here and there
Posts: 18,358


Hmmmm. Anybody want to guess whether David Chukwunonso Allison can even find Chicago, U.S.A. on a map ?


It just couldn't be possible that some enterprising ambulance chaser took a little trip to Lagos to scare up some businesss ? Naaaaaaa, they wouldn't do that, would they ?






______________

Boeing Sued by Nigeria Crash Victim’s Husband, Daughter
By Andrew Harris
June 8, 2012

Quote:
Boeing Co., maker of the MD-83 airliner that crashed in Nigeria on June 3, was sued in the U.S. by the husband and daughter of one of the 153 people aboard the jet who died.

David Chukwunonso Allison of Lagos filed the lawsuit yesterday on behalf of his 1-year-old daughter Naomi Isioma Allison in federal court in Chicago. Boeing, jet-engine maker United Technologies Corp. and units of the companies were named as defendants.

The girl’s mother, Joy Chiedozie Allison, was on Dana Airlines Ltd. flight 992 from Abuja, Nigeria, which crashed into a two-story building as it approached the Lagos airport. While the cause of the crash is under investigation, Nigeria’s government has indefinitely suspended Dana’s license.

“By virtue of her untimely death, plaintiff is lawfully entitled to such damages as are fair and just for the death and loss thus occasioned,” including funeral expenses and the value of her companionship, according to the 57-page complaint.

The Allisons allege the crash was caused by defects in the design or manufacture of the jet or its engines, or pilot negligence.

John Dern, a spokesman for Chicago-based Boeing, declined to comment on the allegations.

“We are deeply saddened by the lives lost in the recent Dana Airlines incident,” Bryan Kidder, a spokesman for United Technologies’ Pratt & Whitney Canada unit, said in an e-mailed statement. “Pratt & Whitney is cooperating fully with investigating authorities and we are unable to offer any further comment as the investigation is ongoing.”

United Technologies is based in Hartford, Connecticut.

The case is Allison v. Boeing, 12-cv-04441, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois (Chicago).



http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...-daughter.html

  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2012, 03:07 PM   #83
trysail
Catch Me Who Can
 
trysail's Avatar
 
trysail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 'twixt here and there
Posts: 18,358


Here we go, AGAIN.

After multiple investigations by everybody from the media to the U.S. Department of Transportation, no fault was ever found in Toyota vehicles.




Toyota Accord Lawyers Seek $200 Million Fee
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-1...tml?cmpid=yhoo
By Elizabeth Amon
December 27, 2012

Quote:
Toyota Motor Corp., Asia’s biggest automaker, will take a $1.1 billion charge to settle U.S. consumer claims that the value of their vehicles diminished because of recalls related to unintended acceleration.

Plaintiffs’ lawyers are asking as much as $200 million in attorneys’ fees, Steve Berman, a lead plaintiffs’ attorney, said. The total will be paid out to 25 firms and about 85 attorneys, according to an article in the Wall Street Journal.

The settlement, pending approval from a judge in federal court in Santa Ana, California, will cover costs such as cash payments to customers, Toyota said in a statement yesterday. The deal is valued at $1.2 billion to $1.4 billion, a record in the U.S. in terms of financial scale and number of vehicles, according to Seattle-based law firm Hagens Berman, which represented plaintiffs.

The one-time charge will be reflected in earnings for the quarter ending Dec. 31, Toyota said. The writedown is separate from the $2 billion in total costs related to the recalls that Toyota had projected in 2010, said Keisuke Kirimoto, a Tokyo- based spokesman. Toyota didn’t admit to any defects in its vehicles or any wrongdoing in the settlement.

The cases were combined in a multidistrict litigation before U.S. District Judge James V. Selna, who is also handling the federal personal injury and death suits. The resolution asks Selna to certify the lawsuit as a class action for settlement purposes.

Lawyers for both sides are asking for immediate preliminary approval, Berman said in an interview yesterday. The lawyers will be seeking final approval in June, after which Toyota owners will get paid, Berman said.

The case is In re Toyota Motor Corp. (7203) Unintended Acceleration Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, 8:10-ml-02151, U.S. District Court, Central District of California (Santa Ana).





http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-1...tml?cmpid=yhoo
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2012, 04:56 PM   #84
njlauren
Literotica Guru
 
njlauren is online now
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by ishtat View Post
Fifteen years ago the state of New South Wales in Australia was second only to California in the gross level and average awards made to personal injury litigants in common law actions. The State government introduced significant hurdles in terms of gaining access to lump sum settlements whilst enabling more cases to receive fixed amounts (sometimes in the nature of a pension) and enabled access to these benefits through administrative procedures rather than litigation.

Lawyers were substantially cut out in Workers compensation, medical malpractice and Motor vehicle injury claims. Insurance costs in real terms have reduced by approximately 55%.

I would also contend that "loser pays " is much fairer than "winner pays" and obviously prevents many frivolous claims.

I also think that the best defence of fairness is a rigorous judge who cannot be removed or sacked except perhaps for insanity. Democratic election of a judge is an oxy moronic concept.
That may have worked in New South Wales, but it hasn't worked in the US, and for a fundamental reason. Despite all the claims about torts and tort reform, when you analyze court settlements and what happens with them, what you find out is all the outrageous jury awards you read about, when you look what happens, often get reduced. There were studies in NJ, (where malpractice premiums are high) and what the studies showed is that the amount of high priced payouts for malpractice have actually declined over the past 20 years or so, and the levels of verdicts>1 million dollars was very, very small, yet we keep hearing about outrageous verdicts, because that plays into the hands of those who want to blame lawyers for everything. I am not a lawyer and I have no stakes in this, but what is interesting is while we demonize trial lawyers, specifically tort lawyers, the right (John Stossel is an asshole, he is a faux news specialist in twisting things into blaming everything on lack of traditional values, letting 'business be business' and so forth) is amazingly silent on corporate lawyers, those phalanxes of people who spend their career basically screwing people with legitimate claims or defending companies against unethical behavior. Want to know why the bankers and financial people didn't pay for their role in the financial meltdown? Because those financial firms maintain batteries of lawyers whose only role is to deflect justice.

Sure, you can sue companies, but know what? Their batteries of legal talent use every trick in the book to delay proceedings, and if you think corporate lawyers don't bribe judges, directly or indirectly, have I got a bridge to sell you. That judge on the civil court bench handling a major case? Think the judge, who may have political aspirations to let's say the federal bench, doesn't figure out that said corporate lawyers through the companies they represent, can offer the carrot that if the judge plays it right, they will make sure the judge gets the nod for an open federal appeals court slot? Think that the individual suing has all the advantages? Think about the deep pockets of the corporation, where through delaying tactics, and the general slow nature of the courts, can keep fighting and basically defer hearings and such....

I don't disagree we need tort reform, but the case against trial lawyers is shaky. Remember the case where the woman burned herself with McDonald's coffee and the right went on a field day, how she was irresponsible driving with the coffee, etc? When you look at the facts, you will find out she wasnt driving, she was in a car, and that Mcdonalds had the temperature of the coffee at something like 180 degrees, which was way, way above where others keep it, and there had been warnings about it. The right smirks and says "see, the women was atupid and mcdonald's had to pay out"..what it also leaves off is the women originally only wanted them to pay for the cost of treating her burns, which was not anywhere near a million bucks (I think it was 10,000 dollars) and McDonald's lawyers were assholes and said no, and she ended up suing, partially in anger at the way she was treated..and oh, yeah, the judgement, as often happens, of the jury was significantly reduced, I think it was like 100k, not the millions the right loves to report...so who was wrong here? Corporate American who frankly doesn't give a shit about anyone and whose lawyers are even more scummy then the trial lawyers we demonize?

Loser pays costs sounds wonderful, but what that also leaves out is it favors corporations, because with the delaying tactics they use, with all the motions, all the delays, etc, that judges grant them, the appeals, they can make the case so expensive that the point is to bankrupt the other side, and in doing so, scare them off. Sounds great if you are a corporate douchebag dumping toxic waste, because it means you can avoid having to pay for your crimes by keeping the other side out, but do you really want that? That is designed to shield corporations from responsibility, not from reigning in ridiculous lawsuits.

BTW current law allows judge to dismiss cases they think are frivolous and to fine attorneys who bring ridiculous cases, and that should be applied but isn't, in part because the ABA strongly objects to judges doing that and judges being lawyers are afraid of repercussions. The ABA on one hand wants to have an advisory roles on judge selection (whether appointed or elected) and will often lobby against judges they don't like, but they are not neutral, because they also can be in the role of making sure judges don't throw out bogus suits.

As far as the 'cost of lawsuits', in many cases that has been overblown. I do think we need tort reform, I think, for example, that with malpractice suits that payouts should represent real financial harm, like lost wages, and a reasonable amount in punitive damages, but I don't think it should all go to the plaintiff, either, in idiotic pain and suffering suits, if they want to make it punitive, have part of the award go to the government as a fine, or donate it to charity or something, so it takes away the very real lotto mentality a lot of people have (while complaining about lawyers, mind you), where junior climbs a neighbor's tree, falls and breaks his arm and is mentally scarred for life supposedly, when people see $$$, I don't mind that.
Having been on a civil jury with an auto accident case, the law frankly sucks, there are no guidelines for juries. The cases I was on was bullshit, the woman who brought it was looking to use a large payout to retire, and when we deliberated we had zero guidelines on how much to give, we had to work it out ourselves (it was not a large award, in the end, it was like 15,000). Legislatures need to give people guidelines because quite frankly, juries are not given information and should be, and there should be limits.

I think lawyers can do a lot themselves. For example, the Bar forbids soliciting (the lawyers who have people in ER's giving out business cards are violating that) but it allows advertising, so you have all those law firms that advertise on Jerry Springer and the like, all those people "Have you fallen? Have you been in an accident? We can get you $$$$", who are basically feeding into the lotto mentality, by banning advertising like that it would stop some fo the abuses, and tort reform would do the rest. Lawyers will argue that doing so will cut down people's access to lawyers, because lawyers like that act on a contingency basis, and thus aren't paid unless you win, but the problem is with big awards, Lawyers are willing to take that chance because for the cases they lose, that one big award where they get 70% of the payout covers all the rest......so even that we have to be careful with ,because otherwise you get where the GOP seems to want everyone, where the courts are only for the rich, there has to be a way to guarantee access for people who have been wronged...

With insurance premiums, what experience here in the US has proven is the claim it was driven by jury awards is bogus, and I am certain of that. I work in the financial industry, have for getting close to 30 years, and insurance companies have been clients of the firms I worked for, so I know what I am talking about.

In the past, insurance companies made money,not from the premiums people paid, but by taking the premiums and investing them, in all kinds of financial instruments. Basically, they operated on the basis that premiums+investment income-payouts =+ territory (profits) and when markets did well that was true. In the past 15 years or so, with the markets becoming more and more unstable, trading volatility increased and markets became more and more about spread arbitrage and rapid trading, the insurance companies have undergone a fundamental shift, and it hasn't been good for clients. What has happened is the insurance industry now expects to make money out of their premiums, and to gain a rate of return that would make their stock prices go up (and pay their CEO's handsomely, the head of United Healthcare made 100 million in compensation one year), while they still invest money that is gravy. 20 years ago, the typical insurance company charged about 10% more in premiums then typical costs; today, that number is between 20 and 30%, which is why premiums have soared. Along with that, insurance companies use their legal staffs as a weapon, and basically what they do is screw their policy holders when paying out, they pay less then they are supposed to, and tell their clients 'don't like it? sue me'..so for example, homeowner loses his house, has 'full replacement' coverage, and the company sends the guy a check for 100k, when the cost is 200k, and says "don't like it, sue me"........

In california, where malpractice rates were going through the roof, several years ago California put limits on tort settlements, specifically on the pain and suffering that were so large parts of awards..and want to know something? No only did rates not decrease (and note, the insurance companies said that even if they passed tort reform rates were not likely to stop going up),they have continued to go up and up..and analysis by independent financial auditors found most oft he reason was about more money in guaranteed return, so they didn't have to worry about the market.

There is no doubt we need tort reform and changes in the legal system, but I am tired of hearing it is a one way street, it isn't, corporate lawyers are not exactly angels and many of them have the morals of a three balled alley cat in heat, they are just as scummy. Lawyers should be policing themselves....I also will add it isn't so surprising, given we are turning out some ridiculous number of lawyers each year, many more then are needed, going into law has this idea around it that you make big bucks and so forth, and then when reality hits you have a lot of lawyers looking for ways to make money, not healthy either.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2012, 09:24 PM   #85
njlauren
Literotica Guru
 
njlauren is online now
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by trysail View Post


Here we go, AGAIN.

After multiple investigations by everybody from the media to the U.S. Department of Transportation, no fault was ever found in Toyota vehicles.




Toyota Accord Lawyers Seek $200 Million Fee
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-1...tml?cmpid=yhoo
By Elizabeth Amon
December 27, 2012
That isn't true, Toyota was forced to recall cars due to manufacturing defects, including an accelerator pedal design defect where it could get hooked under the carpet, and then they were forced to recall SUV's that had a programming defect in their anti rollover functionality that could cause the vehicle to go out of control. The recall wasn't voluntary, they had some design defects that needed to be taken care off.

Just because the company didn't admit guilt doesn't mean there was nothing wrong, and the fact that Toyota recalled millions of vehicles to fix what they said were issues tells a story.

BTW the head of Toyota publicly apologized, he acknowledged that Toyota, in a race to become the world's largest automaker, pushed cars into production too fast, and also sacrificed quality for sales numbers, which went against Toyota's own standards. They also recalled cars in the Japanese market for similar problems.

Last edited by njlauren : 12-27-2012 at 09:26 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2012, 10:11 PM   #86
sr71plt
Literotica Guru
 
sr71plt's Avatar
 
sr71plt is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mid-Atlantic, USA
Posts: 34,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by njlauren View Post
That isn't true
Welcome to Trysail's selective reading world.
__________________
______________________
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-29-2012, 06:09 AM   #87
trysail
Catch Me Who Can
 
trysail's Avatar
 
trysail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 'twixt here and there
Posts: 18,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by trysail View Post


Here we go, AGAIN.

After multiple investigations by everybody from the media to the U.S. Department of Transportation, no fault was ever found in Toyota vehicles.




Toyota Accord Lawyers Seek $200 Million Fee
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-1...tml?cmpid=yhoo
By Elizabeth Amon
December 27, 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by njlauren View Post
That isn't true, Toyota was forced to recall cars due to manufacturing defects, including an accelerator pedal design defect where it could get hooked under the carpet, and then they were forced to recall SUV's that had a programming defect in their anti rollover functionality that could cause the vehicle to go out of control. The recall wasn't voluntary, they had some design defects that needed to be taken care off.

Just because the company didn't admit guilt doesn't mean there was nothing wrong, and the fact that Toyota recalled millions of vehicles to fix what they said were issues tells a story.

BTW the head of Toyota publicly apologized, he acknowledged that Toyota, in a race to become the world's largest automaker, pushed cars into production too fast, and also sacrificed quality for sales numbers, which went against Toyota's own standards. They also recalled cars in the Japanese market for similar problems.




Horseshit. No defects were ever found. By anybody. None. Zilch.

The entire incident is a prime example of legal extortion and harassment accompanied by wholesale slander at the hands of professional gossips. The dumbass lawsuit claimed damages for diminution of value as the result of the defamation by blabbermouths.

If there were any justice, the people who ought to be paying damages are the loudmouth morons of the media— but we know those idiots can say virtually anything and get away with it.

The whole goddamn affair was yet another farce and travesty.


  Reply With Quote

Old 03-21-2013, 03:20 PM   #88
trysail
Catch Me Who Can
 
trysail's Avatar
 
trysail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 'twixt here and there
Posts: 18,358


Ky. high court disbars class-action specialist Chesley stemming from diet drug settlement

By Brett Barrouquere, Associated Press


Quote:
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) -- An Ohio attorney known as the godfather of the modern class-action lawsuit was disbarred Thursday by the Kentucky Supreme Court, which said Stanley Chesley acted unethically in a $200 million settlement involving the makers of the diet drug fen-phen.

The high court concluded that Chesley, who was based in Cincinnati, crossed the ethical line in settling a dispute over health effects stemming from use of the drug. The court concluded that Chesley also refused to acknowledge his conduct was wrong and had dishonest or selfish motives. The decision could result in Chesley being removed as a lead attorney from multiple cases across the country, including pending suits against Toyota.

***


The work earned Chesley the nickname of "Master of Disaster" the legal community.

The disbarment stems from Chesley's involvement with former Kentucky attorneys Melbourne Mills, William Gallion and Shirley Cunningham. Gallion and Cunningham were convicted in 2009 of scamming more than 400 clients out of millions they had won against American Home Products, which renamed itself Wyeth and is now a subsidiary of Pfizer.

Fen-phen was pulled from the market in 1997 after users had heart problems related to the drug. Prosecutors say Gallion and Cunningham illegally kept the bulk of the settlement, but made more money available to their clients after the federal government began a criminal investigation. Chesley wasn't called in the case, but has been implicated in civil court proceedings.

The lawyers sued American Home Products in 2001. The men created a charity, the Kentucky Fund for Healthy Living, with money from the settlement and named themselves and former state judge Joseph Bamberger as directors.

From the settlement, Cunningham received $21 million; Gallion nearly $31 million; Mills almost $24 million; and Chesley more than $20 million. The Kentucky Fund for Healthy Living received $20 million, and several other lawyers divided up $10.5 million. After two distributions, the clients received $73.5 million — just less than 37 percent of the total settlement.

Minton found those attorneys' fees excessive and unacceptable.

After the settlement unraveled in Kentucky Bar Association complaints and litigation, Gallion, Cunningham, Mills, Bamberger and David Helmers, an associate of Gallion's, were disbarred.

Gallion is serving his sentence at a federal prison in Oakdale, La. He is scheduled for release in 2029. Cunningham is serving his sentence at the federal prison in Yazoo City, Miss. He is scheduled for release in 2025.

Gallion and Cunningham were the original owners of 2007 Horse of the Year Curlin, which earned $10.5 during his racing career. Curlin retired from racing in 2008.


more...
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ky-cou...190623441.html
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-25-2013, 05:26 PM   #89
trysail
Catch Me Who Can
 
trysail's Avatar
 
trysail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 'twixt here and there
Posts: 18,358
Quote:
The National Hockey League was sued by former players who accuse it of failing to warn them about the risk of concussions.

...the reporter on this story: Sophia Pearson in federal court in Philadelphia


It figures. Philadelphia.

West Virginia, Alabama and Philadelphia: the ambulance chaser's favorite venues.



  Reply With Quote

Old 08-22-2014, 09:34 AM   #90
trysail
Catch Me Who Can
 
trysail's Avatar
 
trysail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 'twixt here and there
Posts: 18,358

...Kenneth Abbott, a former BP contractor, and Food & Water Watch Inc., an environmental group, sued in 2009 to shut down BP’s second-largest gulf platform. They said engineering drawings for the system’s subsea components lacked required safety approvals.

They also sought to force BP to pay triple damages on the full $88.8 billion estimated value of the Atlantis field, saying the company obtained those offshore leases by lying to regulators in claiming the platform met safety requirements.

“BP never misrepresented -- much less knowingly distorted what it was doing,” U.S. District Judge Lynn N. Hughes in Houston said today in a 10-page summary ruling, finding that the case was ultimately about “paperwork wrinkles” instead of engineering shortcuts.

Abbott and the environmentalists “have not blown a whistle,” he said. “They have blown their own horn.”

...Hughes said Abbott’s “unprincipled” case was “abetted by ideologues.” He said the purported whistle-blower hadn’t visited the gulf personally since 2010, “when he was there to be photographed for ‘60 Minutes.’”




- read the full article BP Atlantis $256 Billion Whistle-Blower Case Dismissed (from Bloomberg)
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:23 AM.

Copyright 1998-2013 Literotica Online. Literotica is a registered trademark.