• Hollywood veteran Neal McDonough tells me faith-based films ARE making a difference https://old.bitchute.com/video/QZKCrew5SmAV/
    Hollywood veteran Neal McDonough tells me faith-based films ARE making a difference https://old.bitchute.com/video/QZKCrew5SmAV/
    OLD.BITCHUTE.COM
    Hollywood veteran Neal McDonough tells me faith-based films ARE making a difference
    Source https://x.com/i/status/1869880394209996851 Hollywood veteran Neal McDonough tells me faith-based films ARE making a difference in Hollywood: “Never, ever, EVER have I seen before 4 or 5 [studios] saying, ‘oh by the way, if you have something…
    0 Comments 0 Shares 69 Views
  • Winning! Major Hollywood Actor Says Studios More Hungry For Faith-Based Films Than Ever Before https://www.infowars.com/posts/winning-major-hollywood-actor-says-studios-more-hungry-for-faith-based-films-than-ever-before
    Winning! Major Hollywood Actor Says Studios More Hungry For Faith-Based Films Than Ever Before https://www.infowars.com/posts/winning-major-hollywood-actor-says-studios-more-hungry-for-faith-based-films-than-ever-before
    Like
    Yay
    2
    0 Comments 1 Shares 142 Views

  • USAA Punished for it Claims Handling

    Punitive Damages Should be Awarded With Caution and Within Narrow Limits

    Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/usaa-punished-claims-handling-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-nbp2c, see the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4950 posts.

    Posted on December 19, 2024 by Barry Zalma

    DISPUTE OVER HURRICANE DAMAGES RESULTS IN MAJOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES FOR BAD FAITH

    Although he Mississippi Supreme Court recognized the need to only award punitive damages with caution and within narrow limits, it did not limit its award in accordance with that maxim. After almost 19 years of litigation the last appeal resolved the various disputes.
    FACTS

    Hurricane Katrina destroyed Paul and Sylvia Minor’s home on August 29, 2005. The Minors had a homeowner’s insurance policy with United Services Automobile Association (USAA). The USAA policy covered damage caused by wind but excluded damage caused by storm surge or flood. The Minors reported their loss with USAA, which resulted in a years-long coverage dispute. USAA ultimately issued payments for damage it concluded was caused by wind but not for damage it concluded was caused by storm surge or flood.

    The Minors maintained that they suffered a total loss caused by wind and demanded that USAA pay the policy limits. The case proceeded to trial in 2013, and the jury awarded the Minors $1,547,293.37 in compensatory damages.

    In United Services Automobile Association v. Estate Of Sylvia F. Minor, Kathryn Minor and Stephen Minor, No. 2023-CA-00049-SCT, Supreme Court of Mississippi, En Banc (December 5, 2024) resolved the bad faith claims.

    The issue was ultimately presented to a jury. The jury awarded the Minors $10,000,000 in punitive damages and $457,858.89 in extra-contractual damages (solely attorneys’ fees). USAA appealed, raising several assignments of error.

    Trial

    To establish its bad faith claim, the Minor Estate introduced various USAA documents, including (1) portions of the USAA underwriting file; (2) the confidential email regarding (a) the engineer’s March 2006 findings and (b) Bergstrom’s conclusion that USAA would be responsible for paying for all the windows and the contents in rooms with windows; and (3) USAA’s letter to the Minors in June 2006 indicating the majority of damage was due to flooding.

    Punitive Damages

    Punitive damages are considered an ‘extraordinary remedy’ and should be awarded ‘with caution and within narrow limits.'” The Supreme Court found that the evidence presented at trial demonstrates a type of conduct for which punitive damages were designed. The Minor Estate provided sufficient proof that USAA acted in bad faith, with complete disregard for the Estate’s rights.

    Whether The $10 Million Punitive Damages Award Should Be Reversed Or, Alternatively, Reduced.

    USAA alternatively argues that the $10 million verdict should be reduced because it claims that the damages award is a 22:1 ratio and therefore unconstitutionally disproportionate to the extra-contractual damages awarded ($457,858.89). USAA relies on State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Co. v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408, 425, 123 S.Ct. 1513, 1524, 155 L.Ed.2d 585 (2003), which states that “[s]ingle-digit multipliers are more likely to comport with due process.” USAA argued that a 1:1 ratio should apply to the damages award here.

    The Supreme Court found that punitive damages is less than seven times the amount of compensatory damages, which it concluded clearly falls within the guideline provided in Campbell.

    A punitive damages award not only serves as a deterrent, it also compensates the plaintiff for its public service in bringing the action. The Supreme Court found the trial court’s decision to force the Minor Estate to use nearly half of its award to pay attorneys’ fees does not adequately compensate the Estate for bringing this action against USAA for its bad faith conduct in handling the Minors’ insurance claim from 2005. Therefore, the Supreme Court concluded that the trial court erred by denying the Estate’s post-trial motion for attorneys’ fees.

    CONCLUSION

    In sum, the trial judge did not err as a matter of law by submitting the issue of punitive damages to jury, and the $10 million award of punitive damages is not unconstitutionally disproportionate. The Supreme Court affirmed the jury verdict awarding the Minor Estate $10 million in punitive damages and $457,858.89 in extra-contractual damages as to attorneys’ fees and reverse the judgment of the trial court and render attorneys’ fees on behalf of the Estate in the amount of $4,500,000, plus post-judgment interest at an annual rate of 4 percent from October 3, 2022, the date of judgment, until paid.

    ZALMA OPINION

    This case that dragged on through the courts of Mississippi for 19 years and resulted in compensatory damages based upon an interpretation finding coverage for the estate and that the insurer’s conduct was so egregious that the estate was entitled to tort damages plus punitive damages many times more than the compensatory damages. The Supreme Court astonishingly concluded that punitive damages were not limited to punishing the insurer but were payment to the estate for its action on behalf of everyone in the state of Mississippi and that they should not be required to pay their lawyers but that payment should come from the insurer as part of its punishment. The Supreme Court ignored the fact that as a result the estate must pay income taxes on the punishment damages since they are not designed to make the insured whole and punished each member and insured of USAA.

    In my opinion it’s time the courts of the USA do away with the tort of bad faith to avoid excessive judgments and allow contract disputes to be enlarged into a major amount of punishment for an insurer who rejected a claim based on interpretation of contract terms and the facts of a loss, like this case. In that regard see my book, It’s Time to Abolish The Tort of Bad Faith Available as a paperback here. Available as a Kindle book here.

    (c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.

    Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.

    Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe

    Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg

    Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
    USAA Punished for it Claims Handling Punitive Damages Should be Awarded With Caution and Within Narrow Limits Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/usaa-punished-claims-handling-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-nbp2c, see the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4950 posts. Posted on December 19, 2024 by Barry Zalma DISPUTE OVER HURRICANE DAMAGES RESULTS IN MAJOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES FOR BAD FAITH Although he Mississippi Supreme Court recognized the need to only award punitive damages with caution and within narrow limits, it did not limit its award in accordance with that maxim. After almost 19 years of litigation the last appeal resolved the various disputes. FACTS Hurricane Katrina destroyed Paul and Sylvia Minor’s home on August 29, 2005. The Minors had a homeowner’s insurance policy with United Services Automobile Association (USAA). The USAA policy covered damage caused by wind but excluded damage caused by storm surge or flood. The Minors reported their loss with USAA, which resulted in a years-long coverage dispute. USAA ultimately issued payments for damage it concluded was caused by wind but not for damage it concluded was caused by storm surge or flood. The Minors maintained that they suffered a total loss caused by wind and demanded that USAA pay the policy limits. The case proceeded to trial in 2013, and the jury awarded the Minors $1,547,293.37 in compensatory damages. In United Services Automobile Association v. Estate Of Sylvia F. Minor, Kathryn Minor and Stephen Minor, No. 2023-CA-00049-SCT, Supreme Court of Mississippi, En Banc (December 5, 2024) resolved the bad faith claims. The issue was ultimately presented to a jury. The jury awarded the Minors $10,000,000 in punitive damages and $457,858.89 in extra-contractual damages (solely attorneys’ fees). USAA appealed, raising several assignments of error. Trial To establish its bad faith claim, the Minor Estate introduced various USAA documents, including (1) portions of the USAA underwriting file; (2) the confidential email regarding (a) the engineer’s March 2006 findings and (b) Bergstrom’s conclusion that USAA would be responsible for paying for all the windows and the contents in rooms with windows; and (3) USAA’s letter to the Minors in June 2006 indicating the majority of damage was due to flooding. Punitive Damages Punitive damages are considered an ‘extraordinary remedy’ and should be awarded ‘with caution and within narrow limits.'” The Supreme Court found that the evidence presented at trial demonstrates a type of conduct for which punitive damages were designed. The Minor Estate provided sufficient proof that USAA acted in bad faith, with complete disregard for the Estate’s rights. Whether The $10 Million Punitive Damages Award Should Be Reversed Or, Alternatively, Reduced. USAA alternatively argues that the $10 million verdict should be reduced because it claims that the damages award is a 22:1 ratio and therefore unconstitutionally disproportionate to the extra-contractual damages awarded ($457,858.89). USAA relies on State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Co. v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408, 425, 123 S.Ct. 1513, 1524, 155 L.Ed.2d 585 (2003), which states that “[s]ingle-digit multipliers are more likely to comport with due process.” USAA argued that a 1:1 ratio should apply to the damages award here. The Supreme Court found that punitive damages is less than seven times the amount of compensatory damages, which it concluded clearly falls within the guideline provided in Campbell. A punitive damages award not only serves as a deterrent, it also compensates the plaintiff for its public service in bringing the action. The Supreme Court found the trial court’s decision to force the Minor Estate to use nearly half of its award to pay attorneys’ fees does not adequately compensate the Estate for bringing this action against USAA for its bad faith conduct in handling the Minors’ insurance claim from 2005. Therefore, the Supreme Court concluded that the trial court erred by denying the Estate’s post-trial motion for attorneys’ fees. CONCLUSION In sum, the trial judge did not err as a matter of law by submitting the issue of punitive damages to jury, and the $10 million award of punitive damages is not unconstitutionally disproportionate. The Supreme Court affirmed the jury verdict awarding the Minor Estate $10 million in punitive damages and $457,858.89 in extra-contractual damages as to attorneys’ fees and reverse the judgment of the trial court and render attorneys’ fees on behalf of the Estate in the amount of $4,500,000, plus post-judgment interest at an annual rate of 4 percent from October 3, 2022, the date of judgment, until paid. ZALMA OPINION This case that dragged on through the courts of Mississippi for 19 years and resulted in compensatory damages based upon an interpretation finding coverage for the estate and that the insurer’s conduct was so egregious that the estate was entitled to tort damages plus punitive damages many times more than the compensatory damages. The Supreme Court astonishingly concluded that punitive damages were not limited to punishing the insurer but were payment to the estate for its action on behalf of everyone in the state of Mississippi and that they should not be required to pay their lawyers but that payment should come from the insurer as part of its punishment. The Supreme Court ignored the fact that as a result the estate must pay income taxes on the punishment damages since they are not designed to make the insured whole and punished each member and insured of USAA. In my opinion it’s time the courts of the USA do away with the tort of bad faith to avoid excessive judgments and allow contract disputes to be enlarged into a major amount of punishment for an insurer who rejected a claim based on interpretation of contract terms and the facts of a loss, like this case. In that regard see my book, It’s Time to Abolish The Tort of Bad Faith Available as a paperback here. Available as a Kindle book here. (c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc. Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos. Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
    WWW.LINKEDIN.COM
    Discover thousands of collaborative articles on 2500+ skills
    Discover 100 collaborative articles on domains such as Marketing, Public Administration, and Healthcare. Our expertly curated collection combines AI-generated content with insights and advice from industry experts, providing you with unique perspectives and up-to-date information on many skills and their applications.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 800 Views
  • https://www.toddstarnes.com/faith/virginia-realtor-found-guilty-of-hate-speech-for-sharing-bible-verse/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=todd-starnes-newsletter&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=firefly
    https://www.toddstarnes.com/faith/virginia-realtor-found-guilty-of-hate-speech-for-sharing-bible-verse/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=todd-starnes-newsletter&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=firefly
    WWW.TODDSTARNES.COM
    Virginia Realtor Found Guilty of Hate Speech for Sharing Bible Verse
    The Virginia Association of Realtors has ruled that a realtor and pastor violated its rules by posting Bible verses and […]
    0 Comments 0 Shares 210 Views

  • Intent to Move is not a Residence

    Residence Premises Requires the Insured to Live in Residence

    Post 4944

    Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/intent-move-residence-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-qmlxc, see the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4900 posts.

    In Paul Villalobos v. Clear Blue Insurance Company, No. 24-20125, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit (December 10, 2024) the the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissa of Plaintiff-Appellant Paul Villalobos’s breach of contract claim following a coverage dispute between himself and his insurer, Clear Blue Insurance Company, because he admitted he did not live in the insured premises.

    FACTS

    Villalobos is named on a Clear Blue homeowners’ policy, which provides coverage for property located at 7503 Muirwood Lane in Houston, Texas (the “Property”). The policy’s “Property Coverages” section states in pertinent part: “We cover . . . [t]he dwelling on the ‘residence premises’ shown in the Declarations.” The policy defines “residence premises,” also in pertinent part, as “[t]he one-family dwelling where you reside . . . on the inception date of the policy period shown in the Declarations.” The Declarations page lists Villalobos as the insured, his mailing address as the Property, and the inception date as September 21, 2021.

    In mid-November 2021, Villalobos reported to Clear Blue that wind and hail had damaged the Property’s roof earlier that month. Clear Blue denied coverage after Villalobos admitted he lived in Colorado and had never resided at the Property.

    Villalobos sued Clear Blue, alleging breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act and the Texas Insurance Code, fraud, and ongoing conspiracy to commit illegal acts.

    ANALYSIS

    During his deposition, Villalobos testified that he lived in Colorado for over nine years and did not reside at the Property when the Clear Blue policy went into effect. Clear Blue moved for summary judgment on Villalobos’s claims, arguing there was no insurance coverage for Villalobos’s property damage as a matter of law.

    Applying Louisiana law, the Fifth Circuit has previously determined that an identical residence requirement in a homeowners’ insurance policy required “more than purchasing a home or intending to move into it.” GeoVera Specialty Ins. Co. v. Joachin, 964 F.3d 390, 393 (5th Cir. 2020).

    Applying Joachin the Fifth Circuit agreed with the district court that the Property did not satisfy the policy’s residence requirement and was not a covered “residence premises” because: it is undisputed that Villalobos did not reside on the Property on the inception date of the Clear Blue policy; and
    Villalobos’s only material argument on appeal is that he intended to move onto the Property.

    Joachin held that “intending to move” is not enough. The Fifth Circuit concluded that there is no coverage under the policy. Accordingly, Villalobos’s breach of contract claim failed and the USDC’s judgment was affirmed.

    ZALMA OPINION

    That something as obvious as a home in Texas cannot be the residence premises of a person who lives full time in Colorado. Insurers issue property insurance policies providing coverage similar to a homeowners policy to the owner of a rental property while a homeowners policy limits coverage to the person who actually resides at the property. That this case went to the Fifth Circuit was the waste of Plaintiff’s time and money, the waste of the time of the trial court, and the waste of the time of the Fifth Circuit who rendered a concise and clear opinion. A less kind judge or appellate court would have imposed sanctions on the party plaintiff and his counsel.

    (c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.

    Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.

    Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe

    Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg

    Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
    Intent to Move is not a Residence Residence Premises Requires the Insured to Live in Residence Post 4944 Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/intent-move-residence-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-qmlxc, see the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4900 posts. In Paul Villalobos v. Clear Blue Insurance Company, No. 24-20125, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit (December 10, 2024) the the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissa of Plaintiff-Appellant Paul Villalobos’s breach of contract claim following a coverage dispute between himself and his insurer, Clear Blue Insurance Company, because he admitted he did not live in the insured premises. FACTS Villalobos is named on a Clear Blue homeowners’ policy, which provides coverage for property located at 7503 Muirwood Lane in Houston, Texas (the “Property”). The policy’s “Property Coverages” section states in pertinent part: “We cover . . . [t]he dwelling on the ‘residence premises’ shown in the Declarations.” The policy defines “residence premises,” also in pertinent part, as “[t]he one-family dwelling where you reside . . . on the inception date of the policy period shown in the Declarations.” The Declarations page lists Villalobos as the insured, his mailing address as the Property, and the inception date as September 21, 2021. In mid-November 2021, Villalobos reported to Clear Blue that wind and hail had damaged the Property’s roof earlier that month. Clear Blue denied coverage after Villalobos admitted he lived in Colorado and had never resided at the Property. Villalobos sued Clear Blue, alleging breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act and the Texas Insurance Code, fraud, and ongoing conspiracy to commit illegal acts. ANALYSIS During his deposition, Villalobos testified that he lived in Colorado for over nine years and did not reside at the Property when the Clear Blue policy went into effect. Clear Blue moved for summary judgment on Villalobos’s claims, arguing there was no insurance coverage for Villalobos’s property damage as a matter of law. Applying Louisiana law, the Fifth Circuit has previously determined that an identical residence requirement in a homeowners’ insurance policy required “more than purchasing a home or intending to move into it.” GeoVera Specialty Ins. Co. v. Joachin, 964 F.3d 390, 393 (5th Cir. 2020). Applying Joachin the Fifth Circuit agreed with the district court that the Property did not satisfy the policy’s residence requirement and was not a covered “residence premises” because: it is undisputed that Villalobos did not reside on the Property on the inception date of the Clear Blue policy; and Villalobos’s only material argument on appeal is that he intended to move onto the Property. Joachin held that “intending to move” is not enough. The Fifth Circuit concluded that there is no coverage under the policy. Accordingly, Villalobos’s breach of contract claim failed and the USDC’s judgment was affirmed. ZALMA OPINION That something as obvious as a home in Texas cannot be the residence premises of a person who lives full time in Colorado. Insurers issue property insurance policies providing coverage similar to a homeowners policy to the owner of a rental property while a homeowners policy limits coverage to the person who actually resides at the property. That this case went to the Fifth Circuit was the waste of Plaintiff’s time and money, the waste of the time of the trial court, and the waste of the time of the Fifth Circuit who rendered a concise and clear opinion. A less kind judge or appellate court would have imposed sanctions on the party plaintiff and his counsel. (c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc. Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos. Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
    WWW.LINKEDIN.COM
    Discover thousands of collaborative articles on 2500+ skills
    Discover 100 collaborative articles on domains such as Marketing, Public Administration, and Healthcare. Our expertly curated collection combines AI-generated content with insights and advice from industry experts, providing you with unique perspectives and up-to-date information on many skills and their applications.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1K Views
  • he Spirit of Christ has return to bless the Highest of Teachings within religion's sophistry, blocking all from Immortality.

    Be you a believer of the faith-based religions, be informed, Christ has spoken through the Ascended Master Vorthieu - the fourth Wise man!

    Spiritual phenomena experienced now, direct from Christ, released a truth hidden from all mankind, we are all lifted in Higher Consciousness. Amen.

    Amazing self-evidential Truth, from that which we know the heart and mind of God.

    The full 52 minutes Spiritual Truth will be on public on December, 25, 2024 as a gift from Spiritualism Australia Limited Family.

    Please donate 🙏🏾for we are dedicated to give you the Ultimate Truth Based upon physical evidence, faith is fine, however, fact is superior.

    https://paypal.me/HIGHERSPIRITUALISMAU?country.x=AU&locale.x=en_AU

    May this Christmas and all your days be as Christmas in celebration, love and Education. Sri Sunkara

    https://shamballaandmasters.blogspot.com/...

    #christmas2024 #education #newage #truth #freedom #jesus #Christmas #christconsciousness #ascendedmasters #thefourthwiseman #spirituality #higherspiritualism
    he Spirit of Christ has return to bless the Highest of Teachings within religion's sophistry, blocking all from Immortality. Be you a believer of the faith-based religions, be informed, Christ has spoken through the Ascended Master Vorthieu - the fourth Wise man! Spiritual phenomena experienced now, direct from Christ, released a truth hidden from all mankind, we are all lifted in Higher Consciousness. Amen. Amazing self-evidential Truth, from that which we know the heart and mind of God. The full 52 minutes Spiritual Truth will be on public on December, 25, 2024 as a gift from Spiritualism Australia Limited Family. Please donate 🙏🏾for we are dedicated to give you the Ultimate Truth Based upon physical evidence, faith is fine, however, fact is superior. https://paypal.me/HIGHERSPIRITUALISMAU?country.x=AU&locale.x=en_AU May this Christmas and all your days be as Christmas in celebration, love and Education. 🌸 Sri Sunkara https://shamballaandmasters.blogspot.com/... #christmas2024 #education #newage #truth #freedom #jesus #Christmas #christconsciousness #ascendedmasters #thefourthwiseman #spirituality #higherspiritualism
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1K Views 0

  • Trial Must Proceed Under Plaintiff’s True Name

    Fraud Defense Insufficient to Allow Plaintiff to Sue Under Pseudonym

    Post 4944

    Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/trial-must-proceed-under-plaintiffs-true-name-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-zc7ic/, see the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4900 posts.

    LITIGANTS MUST NOT HIDE THEIR IDENTITY

    Plaintiff sued State Farm under a pseudonym. The Court subsequently issued an order requiring Plaintiff to proceed using his actual name. Plaintiff appealed that order, and he now seeks to stay the Court’s order while his appeal is pending in James Doe v. State Farm General Insurance Company, No. 23-cv-04734-JSC, United States District Court, N.D. California (November 26, 2024).

    BACKGROUND

    Plaintiff alleged State Farm improperly and in bad faith denied coverage for his claim involving a lost wristwatch that retails at approximately $30,300. He filed his complaint under the pseudonym “James Doe,” insisting a pseudonym was necessary “to protect his privacy, his family, his reputation, and his livelihood, because he has been struggling with mental illnesses.”

    The Court rescinded its order permitting Plaintiff to proceed anonymously.

    At a ZOOM hearing the Court informed Plaintiff his actual name appeared on the Zoom screen. Although Plaintiff had yet to file a motion to stay the Court’s order requiring him to proceed under his actual name. The Court denied State Farm’s motion as to the breach of contract and wrongful policy cancellation claims. Jury trial is scheduled to commence in May 2025.

    DISCUSSION

    Parties may use pseudonyms in the unusual case when nondisclosure of the party’s identity is necessary to protect a person from harassment, injury, ridicule or personal embarrassment. Plaintiff based his claim for anonymity on two grounds:

    1. Plaintiff argues anonymity is necessary because he has revealed highly sensitive and personal matters about himself, his mental illnesses and physical injuries in the course of the case. Yet, Plaintiff did not identify where in the record those highly sensitive matters are discussed. Plaintiff has not sought to redact any portions of his filings, assuming anything in them may be concealed from the public. So, Plaintiff is unlikely to prevail on this theory.
    2. Plaintiff argues anonymity is necessary because the accusation of insurance fraud will ruin his reputation for honesty before a jury has passed judgment on his credibility and honesty at trial. Plaintiff states the case involves grave social stigmatization to Plaintiff because he has been accused of committing or seeking to commit insurance fraud.

    The USDC noted that Plaintiff showed no reasonable probability that an insurer’s material misrepresentation defense transforms a breach of contract claim into a matter of sensitive and highly personal nature, Here, Plaintiff is seeking coverage for a lost wristwatch. If an accusation of insurance fraud were sufficiently stigmatizing to warrant anonymity, then plaintiffs could proceed anonymously virtually anytime they challenge an insurer’s denial of coverage on the basis of a material misrepresentation. The Ninth Circuit’s mandate requires that parties only use pseudonyms in the unusual case.

    IRREPARABLE INJURY

    Plaintiff failed to demonstrate he will be irreparably injured absent a stay. The injury Plaintiff fears has already occurred to some extent by Plaintiff’s own doing. He appeared at a public hearing using his actual name. Further, in its recent summary judgment order, the Court concluded there was a dispute of fact as to whether Plaintiff intentionally concealed or misrepresented a material fact or circumstance relating to his insurance. At this point in this proceeding, there has been no finding of insurance fraud.

    HOIST ON HIS OWN PETARD

    Given that Plaintiff himself proceeded at a public hearing without taking steps to prevent the very disclosure he claims is so injurious, Plaintiff has not met his burden on the irreparable injury factor. As summary judgment was denied on the breach of contract claim, the case is proceeding to trial. The public interest lies in transparent and public court proceedings, especially trials.

    The Court denied Plaintiff’s motion to stay the order requiring Plaintiff to proceed under his actual name.

    ZALMA OPINION

    Pursuing litigation under a pseudonym because the defendant insurer claimed the Plaintiff attempted insurance fraud because his mental health and reputation would be harmed by the claims is insufficient. First, Plaintiff chose to sue State Farm. He could protect his mental health and reputation by not suing. Second, he was willing to attend a Zoom hearing with his true name showing, thereby effectively waiving the claim of anonymity. It could easily be concluded that he has sued under a pseudonym because he was embarrassed he was caught.

    (c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.

    Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.

    Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe

    Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg

    Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
    Trial Must Proceed Under Plaintiff’s True Name Fraud Defense Insufficient to Allow Plaintiff to Sue Under Pseudonym Post 4944 Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/trial-must-proceed-under-plaintiffs-true-name-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-zc7ic/, see the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4900 posts. LITIGANTS MUST NOT HIDE THEIR IDENTITY Plaintiff sued State Farm under a pseudonym. The Court subsequently issued an order requiring Plaintiff to proceed using his actual name. Plaintiff appealed that order, and he now seeks to stay the Court’s order while his appeal is pending in James Doe v. State Farm General Insurance Company, No. 23-cv-04734-JSC, United States District Court, N.D. California (November 26, 2024). BACKGROUND Plaintiff alleged State Farm improperly and in bad faith denied coverage for his claim involving a lost wristwatch that retails at approximately $30,300. He filed his complaint under the pseudonym “James Doe,” insisting a pseudonym was necessary “to protect his privacy, his family, his reputation, and his livelihood, because he has been struggling with mental illnesses.” The Court rescinded its order permitting Plaintiff to proceed anonymously. At a ZOOM hearing the Court informed Plaintiff his actual name appeared on the Zoom screen. Although Plaintiff had yet to file a motion to stay the Court’s order requiring him to proceed under his actual name. The Court denied State Farm’s motion as to the breach of contract and wrongful policy cancellation claims. Jury trial is scheduled to commence in May 2025. DISCUSSION Parties may use pseudonyms in the unusual case when nondisclosure of the party’s identity is necessary to protect a person from harassment, injury, ridicule or personal embarrassment. Plaintiff based his claim for anonymity on two grounds: 1. Plaintiff argues anonymity is necessary because he has revealed highly sensitive and personal matters about himself, his mental illnesses and physical injuries in the course of the case. Yet, Plaintiff did not identify where in the record those highly sensitive matters are discussed. Plaintiff has not sought to redact any portions of his filings, assuming anything in them may be concealed from the public. So, Plaintiff is unlikely to prevail on this theory. 2. Plaintiff argues anonymity is necessary because the accusation of insurance fraud will ruin his reputation for honesty before a jury has passed judgment on his credibility and honesty at trial. Plaintiff states the case involves grave social stigmatization to Plaintiff because he has been accused of committing or seeking to commit insurance fraud. The USDC noted that Plaintiff showed no reasonable probability that an insurer’s material misrepresentation defense transforms a breach of contract claim into a matter of sensitive and highly personal nature, Here, Plaintiff is seeking coverage for a lost wristwatch. If an accusation of insurance fraud were sufficiently stigmatizing to warrant anonymity, then plaintiffs could proceed anonymously virtually anytime they challenge an insurer’s denial of coverage on the basis of a material misrepresentation. The Ninth Circuit’s mandate requires that parties only use pseudonyms in the unusual case. IRREPARABLE INJURY Plaintiff failed to demonstrate he will be irreparably injured absent a stay. The injury Plaintiff fears has already occurred to some extent by Plaintiff’s own doing. He appeared at a public hearing using his actual name. Further, in its recent summary judgment order, the Court concluded there was a dispute of fact as to whether Plaintiff intentionally concealed or misrepresented a material fact or circumstance relating to his insurance. At this point in this proceeding, there has been no finding of insurance fraud. HOIST ON HIS OWN PETARD Given that Plaintiff himself proceeded at a public hearing without taking steps to prevent the very disclosure he claims is so injurious, Plaintiff has not met his burden on the irreparable injury factor. As summary judgment was denied on the breach of contract claim, the case is proceeding to trial. The public interest lies in transparent and public court proceedings, especially trials. The Court denied Plaintiff’s motion to stay the order requiring Plaintiff to proceed under his actual name. ZALMA OPINION Pursuing litigation under a pseudonym because the defendant insurer claimed the Plaintiff attempted insurance fraud because his mental health and reputation would be harmed by the claims is insufficient. First, Plaintiff chose to sue State Farm. He could protect his mental health and reputation by not suing. Second, he was willing to attend a Zoom hearing with his true name showing, thereby effectively waiving the claim of anonymity. It could easily be concluded that he has sued under a pseudonym because he was embarrassed he was caught. (c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc. Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos. Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1K Views
  • Vaccine Propaganda and Coercion

    We ALL should now KNOW FOR CERTAIN the reason for the coercion, unlawful #Discrimination, Dancing Nurses, and the unlawful "Vaccine Mandates" (For a GENE THERAPY, not a vaccine) the #Censorship of truthful information, the "Fact-Checking" #Propaganda, and the numerous other violations of the #NurembergCode that were committed by the corporation you call "#Government" were designed to coerce the people into taking a #DNA altering "GENE THERAPY" in violation of every medical ethics rule ever made, to get people to take a #WEAPON of #Genocide

    Those guilty of this #CrimeAgainstHumanity must have figured that everyone who could possibly hold them accountable for this demonic act would be DEAD!

    It's about time to hold those responsible accountable!
    There was NOTHING "innocent" about this operation!

    This was not done "in good faith" as they want you to believe!
    This was done to further the #Depopulation Agenda of madmen and #Luciferians (who run every "government" on earth)

    EVERYTHING about this #HOAX was designed to get you to allow a WEAPON to be injected into your body! And if you cannot clearly see as much... YOU MUST BE BLIND!

    OR you are in a trance from watching their #MKUltra #MindControl propaganda on television, and in radio.

    EVERYTHING on television is designed to put you into a hypnotic state and manipulate your reality and control your mind

    TO THIS DAY THERE HAVE BEEN NO ARRESTS MADE
    of those responsible for this attack on all of mankind!

    That tells me that #Police and #LawEnforcement, and even the #Courts are ALL COMPLICIT IN THESE CRIMES!

    These people THINK they will go unpunished for these crimes...
    It is time for humanity to prove them WRONG!

    It is time for people to be HELD ACCOUNTABLE!
    And that includes ALL "Law Enforcement" Agencies and political #Parasites who have failed to take action and to STOP the continuing distribution of these weapons of genocide!

    The #WHO and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Fauci, and the EcoHealth Alliance, and the DOD, FDA, and #CDC are all also complicit in these crimes.

    As are platforms like FaceBook, YouTube, and Google who ALL used #Censorship to prevent LIFE SAVING INFORMATION to get out to the public, which quite possibly could have saved many lives!

    https://eppc.org/publication/vaccine-propaganda-and-coercion/
    Vaccine Propaganda and Coercion We ALL should now KNOW FOR CERTAIN the reason for the coercion, unlawful #Discrimination, Dancing Nurses, and the unlawful "Vaccine Mandates" (For a GENE THERAPY, not a vaccine) the #Censorship of truthful information, the "Fact-Checking" #Propaganda, and the numerous other violations of the #NurembergCode that were committed by the corporation you call "#Government" were designed to coerce the people into taking a #DNA altering "GENE THERAPY" in violation of every medical ethics rule ever made, to get people to take a #WEAPON of #Genocide Those guilty of this #CrimeAgainstHumanity must have figured that everyone who could possibly hold them accountable for this demonic act would be DEAD! It's about time to hold those responsible accountable! There was NOTHING "innocent" about this operation! This was not done "in good faith" as they want you to believe! This was done to further the #Depopulation Agenda of madmen and #Luciferians (who run every "government" on earth) EVERYTHING about this #HOAX was designed to get you to allow a WEAPON to be injected into your body! And if you cannot clearly see as much... YOU MUST BE BLIND! OR you are in a trance from watching their #MKUltra #MindControl propaganda on television, and in radio. EVERYTHING on television is designed to put you into a hypnotic state and manipulate your reality and control your mind TO THIS DAY THERE HAVE BEEN NO ARRESTS MADE of those responsible for this attack on all of mankind! That tells me that #Police and #LawEnforcement, and even the #Courts are ALL COMPLICIT IN THESE CRIMES! These people THINK they will go unpunished for these crimes... It is time for humanity to prove them WRONG! It is time for people to be HELD ACCOUNTABLE! And that includes ALL "Law Enforcement" Agencies and political #Parasites who have failed to take action and to STOP the continuing distribution of these weapons of genocide! The #WHO and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Fauci, and the EcoHealth Alliance, and the DOD, FDA, and #CDC are all also complicit in these crimes. As are platforms like FaceBook, YouTube, and Google who ALL used #Censorship to prevent LIFE SAVING INFORMATION to get out to the public, which quite possibly could have saved many lives! https://eppc.org/publication/vaccine-propaganda-and-coercion/
    EPPC.ORG
    Vaccine Propaganda and Coercion - Ethics & Public Policy Center
    Institutions embraced these misguided policies with little public discussion and no debate.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 2K Views
  • WHAT 'GOD' IS RELIGION WORSHIPPING? -
    DAVID ICKE DOT-CONNECTOR VIDEOCAST

    Well David, I really could not tell you!
    "Religion" is the traditions of MAN, and really have NOTHING to do with
    the word of YHWH!

    While I'm a very strong believer.... I'm NOT "religious" at all
    I put my faith and trust in Him who Created me, and protected my bloodline
    so that I could be here discussing your nonsense TODAY!

    Anyway....

    David Icke's New Age drivel has went into overdrive......
    And now he's attacking the Creator!

    While I enjoy hearing David's perspective most times, except for the new age drivel he pushes.... Like the hypnosis hosespit.... He simply don't know what he is talking about.

    If he actually knew anything about YHWH, his Creator, he would know that he commanded "So much killing" in the old testament because the #Nephilim had infected human DNA, along with the animals, birds and fish (Just like is happening NOW) and those same Nephilim were EATING mankind and drinking their blood etc.... and had just about eradicated mankind, which is what triggered the flood!

    And the reason they were commanded to "Kill them all" is because they were those Nephilim hybrid GIANTS! Which were threatening to eradicate His Creation! (Man)

    Rob Skiba explained it very well in a video he did about the book of Enoch, Jasher, Jubilees (Removed books) where that information is obtained.

    So if you need an answer to David's question....
    Perhaps you should head over there and educate yourself as well

    Defending the book of Enoch and explaining the Pre and Post-Flood Nephilim
    https://youtu.be/LxohctQwRNw

    He is critiquing something because he don't fully know what he is talking about. And BTW.... there are very few actual "Christians" in the world. A lot claim to be!

    I was wondering when the new age BS would turn into outright blasphemy

    https://old.bitchute.com/video/12CdpftZiFAz/
    WHAT 'GOD' IS RELIGION WORSHIPPING? - DAVID ICKE DOT-CONNECTOR VIDEOCAST Well David, I really could not tell you! "Religion" is the traditions of MAN, and really have NOTHING to do with the word of YHWH! While I'm a very strong believer.... I'm NOT "religious" at all I put my faith and trust in Him who Created me, and protected my bloodline so that I could be here discussing your nonsense TODAY! Anyway.... David Icke's New Age drivel has went into overdrive...... And now he's attacking the Creator! While I enjoy hearing David's perspective most times, except for the new age drivel he pushes.... Like the hypnosis hosespit.... He simply don't know what he is talking about. If he actually knew anything about YHWH, his Creator, he would know that he commanded "So much killing" in the old testament because the #Nephilim had infected human DNA, along with the animals, birds and fish (Just like is happening NOW) and those same Nephilim were EATING mankind and drinking their blood etc.... and had just about eradicated mankind, which is what triggered the flood! And the reason they were commanded to "Kill them all" is because they were those Nephilim hybrid GIANTS! Which were threatening to eradicate His Creation! (Man) Rob Skiba explained it very well in a video he did about the book of Enoch, Jasher, Jubilees (Removed books) where that information is obtained. So if you need an answer to David's question.... Perhaps you should head over there and educate yourself as well Defending the book of Enoch and explaining the Pre and Post-Flood Nephilim https://youtu.be/LxohctQwRNw He is critiquing something because he don't fully know what he is talking about. And BTW.... there are very few actual "Christians" in the world. A lot claim to be! I was wondering when the new age BS would turn into outright blasphemy https://old.bitchute.com/video/12CdpftZiFAz/
    0 Comments 0 Shares 964 Views
  • It seems to be a really big issue with the Atheists.....

    They will claim "It requires no #Faith to be an #Atheist!"
    "We are simply saying that we don't believe YOUR explanation!"

    But actually....
    It DOES require Faith!

    Because there is a large body of #Evidence supporting people's belief in the Most High...
    and they are choosing to disregard that evidence, in most cases, in favor of an explanation like....

    ‘From Absolutely Nothing:’ The Logical Extension Of Atheism
    The logical conclusion of atheism is the belief that there was once Absolutely Nothing. For a very, very long time, Absolutely Nothing did absolutely nothing. But one day, without warning, Absolutely Nothing created Everything, for no apparent reason. It did this in a magical explosion which came from Absolutely Nothing. For a very long time after this, the Everything that came from Absolutely Nothing was completely dead. The Dead Everything just drifted around, randomly clumping together, eventually forming stars and planets, solar systems and galaxies, powerful black holes and beautiful gas nebulae. Absolutely Nothing taught it how to do this. On Earth, the Dead Everything formed itself into oceans and islands, stunningly beautiful mountain ranges, magnificent waterfalls, deep valleys, monumental glaciers and warm tropical beaches. Absolutely Nothing taught the Dead Everything that used to be nothing how to do this.

    But there was no life. Dead Everything was completely dead. Not a single living cell. Not a blade of grass. Not the smallest microbe in the ocean. Just dead, inanimate matter. But then another magical thing happened. One day, without warning, for no reason whatsoever, Dead Everything magically created living cells. We have no idea how Dead Everything did this, because we still can’t do this today, despite all our technology and the accumulated wisdom of our greatest scientific minds. The Dead Everything must have been extremely clever, probably because it was taught by Absolutely Nothing. We also don’t know why Dead Everything isn’t still creating living cells from dead matter today. Perhaps Absolutely Nothing originally told Dead Everything how to do it, but now Dead Everything has forgotten.

    Anyway, the magical living cells, created by Dead Everything had no intelligence of their own, yet they eventually formed themselves into grass and trees, fish and birds, insects and reptiles, and mammals of all shapes and sizes. Absolutely Nothing told the magical living cells how to do this. Absolutely Nothing did this by creating a highly complex biological coding, called DNA, that it placed inside every living cell. This is a coded set of instructions more complex than the most sophisticated computers mankind has ever built. Absolutely Nothing eventually gave every living cell a complete set of these instructions, involving literally billions of lines of specific biological code, telling each cell how to grow into all the different lifeforms that we see today.

    Absolutely Nothing told some living cells how to eventually grow into Atheists. Atheists believe in Absolutely Nothing. They have told the rest of us how Absolutely Nothing created Dead Everything in the beginning and how Absolutely Nothing then magically created the living world that we see around us today. We don’t know how Atheists learned about all this, since they weren’t there in the beginning when all of this supposedly happened. Perhaps Absolutely Nothing told them. Atheists have also told the rest of us that when we die, we go to Absolutely Nothing and turn into Absolutely Nothing ourselves. This is very exciting news! In the meantime, this understanding of our origins and eventual destiny gives us meaning and purpose. Since we now know that we came from Absolutely Nothing and will return to Absolutely Nothing, we can live our whole lives for Absolutely Nothing. Our ethics and morals are based upon Absolutely Nothing, and we serve Absolutely Nothing faithfully. Thank goodness for Atheism.

    Atheists. And they mock Christian beliefs!

    Anything you say......
    **Smile and Nod**

    Personally.... I don't really care WHAT you believe!
    But when you attack my beliefs I feel the need to point out the flaws in your own
    It seems to be a really big issue with the Atheists..... They will claim "It requires no #Faith to be an #Atheist!" "We are simply saying that we don't believe YOUR explanation!" But actually.... It DOES require Faith! Because there is a large body of #Evidence supporting people's belief in the Most High... and they are choosing to disregard that evidence, in most cases, in favor of an explanation like.... ‘From Absolutely Nothing:’ The Logical Extension Of Atheism The logical conclusion of atheism is the belief that there was once Absolutely Nothing. For a very, very long time, Absolutely Nothing did absolutely nothing. But one day, without warning, Absolutely Nothing created Everything, for no apparent reason. It did this in a magical explosion which came from Absolutely Nothing. For a very long time after this, the Everything that came from Absolutely Nothing was completely dead. The Dead Everything just drifted around, randomly clumping together, eventually forming stars and planets, solar systems and galaxies, powerful black holes and beautiful gas nebulae. Absolutely Nothing taught it how to do this. On Earth, the Dead Everything formed itself into oceans and islands, stunningly beautiful mountain ranges, magnificent waterfalls, deep valleys, monumental glaciers and warm tropical beaches. Absolutely Nothing taught the Dead Everything that used to be nothing how to do this. But there was no life. Dead Everything was completely dead. Not a single living cell. Not a blade of grass. Not the smallest microbe in the ocean. Just dead, inanimate matter. But then another magical thing happened. One day, without warning, for no reason whatsoever, Dead Everything magically created living cells. We have no idea how Dead Everything did this, because we still can’t do this today, despite all our technology and the accumulated wisdom of our greatest scientific minds. The Dead Everything must have been extremely clever, probably because it was taught by Absolutely Nothing. We also don’t know why Dead Everything isn’t still creating living cells from dead matter today. Perhaps Absolutely Nothing originally told Dead Everything how to do it, but now Dead Everything has forgotten. Anyway, the magical living cells, created by Dead Everything had no intelligence of their own, yet they eventually formed themselves into grass and trees, fish and birds, insects and reptiles, and mammals of all shapes and sizes. Absolutely Nothing told the magical living cells how to do this. Absolutely Nothing did this by creating a highly complex biological coding, called DNA, that it placed inside every living cell. This is a coded set of instructions more complex than the most sophisticated computers mankind has ever built. Absolutely Nothing eventually gave every living cell a complete set of these instructions, involving literally billions of lines of specific biological code, telling each cell how to grow into all the different lifeforms that we see today. Absolutely Nothing told some living cells how to eventually grow into Atheists. Atheists believe in Absolutely Nothing. They have told the rest of us how Absolutely Nothing created Dead Everything in the beginning and how Absolutely Nothing then magically created the living world that we see around us today. We don’t know how Atheists learned about all this, since they weren’t there in the beginning when all of this supposedly happened. Perhaps Absolutely Nothing told them. Atheists have also told the rest of us that when we die, we go to Absolutely Nothing and turn into Absolutely Nothing ourselves. This is very exciting news! In the meantime, this understanding of our origins and eventual destiny gives us meaning and purpose. Since we now know that we came from Absolutely Nothing and will return to Absolutely Nothing, we can live our whole lives for Absolutely Nothing. Our ethics and morals are based upon Absolutely Nothing, and we serve Absolutely Nothing faithfully. Thank goodness for Atheism. Atheists. And they mock Christian beliefs! Anything you say...... **Smile and Nod** Personally.... I don't really care WHAT you believe! But when you attack my beliefs I feel the need to point out the flaws in your own
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1K Views
More Results
Sponsored

We are 100% funded for October.

Thanks to everyone who helped out. 🥰

Xephula monthly operating expenses for 2024 - Server: $143/month - Backup Software: $6/month - Object Storage: $6/month - SMTP Service: $10/month - Stripe Processing Fees: ~$10/month - Total: $175/month

Xephula Funding Meter

Please Donate Here