Slabbed Scoops the News: Bossier gets nothing in Phase 2

2009 November 12
by sop81_1

We’ve confirmed Kris Carter’s comment. On behalf of Nowdy and Bam Bam we’d like to thank Mr and Mrs Bossier for sticking with this litigation to the end. While our gratitude will certainly be of little solace to them right now perhaps in time they’ll take comfort from the greater good it accomplished. We also thank Judy Guice.  The tenacity in her advocating for the Bossiers is self-evident and indicative of the fine consumer lawyer she is.

I’ll be back with some analysis a bit later on the jury.

sop

5 Responses leave one →
  1. 2009 November 12

    “What a revolting development this is.” William Bendix of “The Life of Riley”, Friday night T.V. show in the early 50’s, airing just before the “Friday Night Fight(s)”. (Television was a relatively “new” invention at the time).

  2. 2009 November 12
    NRB permalink

    Is there any idea as to what went wrong?

    What was the makeup of the jury if anybody knows?

    What State Farm documents (not win/water protocol because that document is very difficult to use as a tool to explain bad faith) did Judy Guice use?

    Is the jury pool in So. Dist. Ms. really that bad for plaintiffs?

    The Eastern Dist of La. is not great, but it seems Ms. is really bad. Is that the case?

  3. 2009 November 13

    NRB your points in order:

    Yes
    5 men 3 women
    Nowdy is traveling and she is our document expert.
    No
    No

    Juries look at the bigger picture and tend to shy away from the legal minutae found in insurance law. They blamed the Bossiers for not having flood insurance. The line of thinking represents a red herring planted by the Farm’s legal team and it stuck.

    sop

  4. 2009 November 13
    NRB permalink

    Not enough flood insurance? That was an “all in defense” meaning it would either win or backfire big time. We now know it stuckto use your term.

    This will simply embolden State Farm.

    I wonder what State Farm evaluated their best day at? I suspect this judgment is close to their evaluation of their “best” day. In fact, it the judgment may have been better with respect to their “best day” evaluation.

  5. 2009 November 14
    shirley heflin permalink

    Well, my prediction that they’d get “something” in their “bad faith case” was (obviously) wrong, but to get NOTHING is shocking. What’s also shocking is the manner in which MS “tries” a bad faith case. It happens differently here in Fla. (and maybe other States, I don’t know), but here (in Fla. anyway) the bad faith case is filed separately from the underlying contractual claim for a # of reasons and logic or it wouldn’t be the law here and I’m not an atty. – just a Legal Secretary that’s worked in the plaintiff’s ins. world for over 20 yrs. – but I don’t need to be an atty. to see the logic of having a prepared bad faith case presented to a jury after discovery is conducted under a new case # – not the same case # and the same cast that just heard the underlying contractual claim! Come on, these people are tired, now you want them to understand “bad faith” law? Please!

    First, (in Fla.) the “bad faith” case is filed separately because if the insured loses the underlying (first) lawsuit for breach of contract, wrongful denial, etc., there’s not going to (necessarily) be a bad faith case. One is not going to have “Ex. A” (i.e., the successful Verdict form) to attach to the bad faith complaint.

    Second, in the separate bad faith case, there’s a new case # and more discovery to be conducted, more subpoenas to be issued, more depositions of adjusters regarding their clms. handling of the underlying case that was won at trial and new evidence usually “comes out,” etc., in the bad faith suit. But to have a “bad faith” case presented to the same jury that just heard the underlying case – I can’t fathom the thought. It’s impossible and unfair because where is the preparation for same? There is none and it is not the Plaintiff’s fault MS law is the way it is.

    IMHO, it is very unfortunate and sad that yes, Mr. & Mrs. Bossier, we put you through hell, made you go through a jury trial, paid you some here and there and, oh yeah, cuz the jury says so, here’s $52,000 plus more – but bad faith damages? No, we’re not getting punished for that – we’re getting away w/that because the law (as it is now) allows us to and we get to use the $ that we should have paid yall any ole’ way we want to.

    SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE!

    SHIRLEY HEFLIN

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS