January 30th, 2007
A Wisconsin attorney who once prosecuted drunken drivers for the Madison attorney’s office has been charged with DUI after arriving at a police station to pick up a client charged with DUI. Attorney Rick Petri says he got a phone call around 2 a.m. from police saying his client, Patrick DePula, had been charged with drunk driving. Petri admitted that he had been drinking alcohol in front of his television earlier in the evening but thought that it would be out of his system when he had to pick up DePula. Petri blew a 0.09 on a breath test at the police station. Petri and DePula were charged with first offenses punishable by fine, license suspension or revocation of up to 6-9 months, and an alcohol assessment. Petri apologized and expressed his embarrassment about the incident. He also added that he hopes people learn a valuable lesson from his actions.
January 30th, 2007
A Nevada Supreme Court opinion called an attorney’s arguments “misconduct” because they “encouraged jurors to look beyond the law and the relevant facts in deciding the case before them.” The court imposed sanctions on the attorney, Phillip Emerson, and referred the case to the State Bar for further disciplinary proceedings.
Emerson reportedly made arguments about personal injury litigation in general during four trials in which he represented defendants. His comments centered around the idea that such trials wasted taxpayers’ money and jurors’ time, and were contributing to the declining view of the legal profession.
The unusual court ruling raises questions about the acceptable boundaries of arguing beyond existing law when addressing a jury, and may inspire judges to tighten standards for courtroom argument, at least in Nevada.
January 30th, 2007
A federal judge has put a $50 million Hurricane Katrina class action settlement for as many as 35,000 State Farm policy holders on hold due to the need for more information from the parties involved, especially the insurance company. U.S. District Judge L.T. Senter of the U.S. District Court of Southern Mississippi decline to sign off on the widely-reported settlement and wrote that the settlement did not establish a “fair, just, balanced or reasonable” procedure for handling such claims. The rejected agreement promised that State Farm would reconsider Hurricane Katrina insurance claims and denials for some 35,000 policyholders who did not sue the company.
Specifically, Senter questioned everything from plaintiff cases and blanket security given to State Farm and its agents to the moneys involved and the scope of the insurance settlement. Senter especially wondered if the blanket immunity and proposed claims process would give State Farm too much power in these types of cases. He also said the plan was not a global settlement because it didn’t do enough to include claims of those people currently involved in litigation who may wish to opt into this settlement, and added that the $50 million cap should be broadened. With that said, the leading plaintiff attorneys in the settlement said that they still plan to make initial payments to the hundreds of families they represent in the settlement apart from the proposed class.
It is unknown whether this federal decision will affect a separate $80 million settlement between State Farm and some 640 cases already in litigation.
