• LIGHTNING STRIKE KILLS ONE AND THE REST MYSTERIOUSLY ALL FALL DOWN

    I dunno.... kind of strange
    one guy has a delayed reaction

    Our bodies DO operate on electrical signals!

    I know this... lightning once struck a tree about 50 feet from a bay window that I was sitting in front of, just outside of my house, and it was so loud and intense that I thought it hit MY HOUSE!

    The concussive blast could be felt!
    It shook my body as well as my house!

    I was laying on the couch so I didn't fall down....

    But had I been upright, I'd have hit the deck
    whether it was voluntarily or involuntarily!

    https://old.bitchute.com/video/jx4BUGUj0Gyr/
    LIGHTNING STRIKE KILLS ONE AND THE REST MYSTERIOUSLY ALL FALL DOWN I dunno.... kind of strange one guy has a delayed reaction Our bodies DO operate on electrical signals! I know this... lightning once struck a tree about 50 feet from a bay window that I was sitting in front of, just outside of my house, and it was so loud and intense that I thought it hit MY HOUSE! The concussive blast could be felt! It shook my body as well as my house! I was laying on the couch so I didn't fall down.... But had I been upright, I'd have hit the deck whether it was voluntarily or involuntarily! https://old.bitchute.com/video/jx4BUGUj0Gyr/
    OLD.BITCHUTE.COM
    Lightning Strike kills one and the rest mysteriously all fall down
    Lightning Strike kills one & injures several other during Football Match in Peru
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos 142 Visualizações
  • Actually, The Democratic Party Is Hitler.
    Along about now, you’re probably wondering what sort of mayhem the Party of Chaos is set to unleash on our democracy after their mighty ballot fraud operation fails to overcome the yet more powerful instinct of the voters to expel them from the seats of power they seized by fraud in 2020 and 2022. You can be sure they’ve gamed-out a playbook aimed at paralyzing the nation one way or another if the effort to install Kamala Harris in the White House face-plants, as it appears to be doing in these final days before the reckoning. More likely, the Party will hijack the nation’s legal machinery to cancel the election ex post facto. They’ve done a swell job in advance setting up conditions that make it difficult if not impossible to sort out legal ballots cast from the frauds. So, expect the Party’s chief lawfare ninja Marc Elias, and his zillion-dollar-funded cadre of pettifoggers, to contest the swing-state precincts where their ballot-harvest somehow fell short a few bushels. They’ll file enough lawsuits to gum up the courts until the sun becomes a red dwarf.
    If the actual numbers add up to a Trump victory, the Democrats will re-brand that as the new “Big Lie” and commence a strenuous campaign in the old media to gaslight the public into believing the vote-count isn’t what it looks like. After all, numbers are math and math is racist. That will provide the rationale, and furnish the game-space, to stop Trump by other means.
    Anyway you cut it, the hysteria in the body politic is running at a pitch — as Mr. Trump himself might say — that has never been seen before, at least not since Fort Sumter. The Democrats complain that a Trump victory means the Department of Justice will be weaponized against them. Is that rich, or what? It actually tells the whole story since you know the Party always accuses its opponents of exactly what it is already doing.
    Speaking of which, we must look forward to Judge Juan Merchan’s November 26th sentencing of Mr. Trump in DA Alvin Bragg’s “Stormy Daniels hush money” case. It’s out there, looming, and it ain’t going away. Judge Merchan is going to have to do. . . something! The jury has pronounced Mr. Trump guilty of those 34 “felonies” (based on 34 book-keeping entries, originally misdemeanors, and beyond the applicable statute of limitations).
    I’d like to see the Judge stash the president-elect in the Rikers Island lockup for a few hours. It’ll be a better stunt than Mr. Trump’s shift serving fries at McDonald’s, or riding the garbage truck after “Joe Biden” called more than half the country that supports him “garbage.” Because a few hours after Mr. Trump settles into his Rikers cell and enjoys his first boloney sandwich, the SCOTUS is going to turn a flame thrower on Judge Merchan and Alvin Bragg and vacate the absurd case and every half-assed procedure that was used to arrive at it, and refer Merchan and Bragg for disbarment for professional misconduct, malicious prosecution, and failure to uphold the law.
    Actually, The Democratic Party Is Hitler. Along about now, you’re probably wondering what sort of mayhem the Party of Chaos is set to unleash on our democracy after their mighty ballot fraud operation fails to overcome the yet more powerful instinct of the voters to expel them from the seats of power they seized by fraud in 2020 and 2022. You can be sure they’ve gamed-out a playbook aimed at paralyzing the nation one way or another if the effort to install Kamala Harris in the White House face-plants, as it appears to be doing in these final days before the reckoning. More likely, the Party will hijack the nation’s legal machinery to cancel the election ex post facto. They’ve done a swell job in advance setting up conditions that make it difficult if not impossible to sort out legal ballots cast from the frauds. So, expect the Party’s chief lawfare ninja Marc Elias, and his zillion-dollar-funded cadre of pettifoggers, to contest the swing-state precincts where their ballot-harvest somehow fell short a few bushels. They’ll file enough lawsuits to gum up the courts until the sun becomes a red dwarf. If the actual numbers add up to a Trump victory, the Democrats will re-brand that as the new “Big Lie” and commence a strenuous campaign in the old media to gaslight the public into believing the vote-count isn’t what it looks like. After all, numbers are math and math is racist. That will provide the rationale, and furnish the game-space, to stop Trump by other means. Anyway you cut it, the hysteria in the body politic is running at a pitch — as Mr. Trump himself might say — that has never been seen before, at least not since Fort Sumter. The Democrats complain that a Trump victory means the Department of Justice will be weaponized against them. Is that rich, or what? It actually tells the whole story since you know the Party always accuses its opponents of exactly what it is already doing. Speaking of which, we must look forward to Judge Juan Merchan’s November 26th sentencing of Mr. Trump in DA Alvin Bragg’s “Stormy Daniels hush money” case. It’s out there, looming, and it ain’t going away. Judge Merchan is going to have to do. . . something! The jury has pronounced Mr. Trump guilty of those 34 “felonies” (based on 34 book-keeping entries, originally misdemeanors, and beyond the applicable statute of limitations). I’d like to see the Judge stash the president-elect in the Rikers Island lockup for a few hours. It’ll be a better stunt than Mr. Trump’s shift serving fries at McDonald’s, or riding the garbage truck after “Joe Biden” called more than half the country that supports him “garbage.” Because a few hours after Mr. Trump settles into his Rikers cell and enjoys his first boloney sandwich, the SCOTUS is going to turn a flame thrower on Judge Merchan and Alvin Bragg and vacate the absurd case and every half-assed procedure that was used to arrive at it, and refer Merchan and Bragg for disbarment for professional misconduct, malicious prosecution, and failure to uphold the law.
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos 640 Visualizações
  • The American Journal: Trashman Trump Trolls Dems With Garbage Truck & Safety Vest While Biden Bites Babies At White House

    WATCH NOW | #AmericanJournal

    https://madmaxworld.tv/channel/the-american-journal
    https://www.infowars.com/posts/watch-live-trashman-trump-trolls-dems-with-garbage-truck-safety-vest-while-biden-bites-babies-at-white-house

    ȯSUPPORT THE INFOWAR: www.TheAlexJonesStore.com
    The American Journal: Trashman Trump Trolls Dems With Garbage Truck & Safety Vest While Biden Bites Babies At White House WATCH NOW | #AmericanJournal https://madmaxworld.tv/channel/the-american-journal https://www.infowars.com/posts/watch-live-trashman-trump-trolls-dems-with-garbage-truck-safety-vest-while-biden-bites-babies-at-white-house ȯSUPPORT THE INFOWAR: www.TheAlexJonesStore.com
    MADMAXWORLD.TV
    The American Journal
    Taking a record of the heart and minds of the people, American Journal puts the power of the conversation into the callers' hands. Join us Monday through Friday, 8-11AM CST and call in to talk to Harrison Smith about all current topics and stories in the news and on your mind.
    Haha
    1
    0 Comentários 2 Compartilhamentos 255 Visualizações

  • Officer Caught Aiding Criminals for Cash

    Police Officer who took Bribes from Insurance Fraudster Convicted

    Post 4923

    Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/officer-caught-aiding-criminals-cash-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-niboc, see the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4900 posts.

    Demarkco Johnson (“Johnson”), appealed his convictions and claims the following errors:

    1 The trial court abused its discretion in denying appellant’s request for a jury instruction on entrapment.
    2 The trial court erred in failing to admonish and/or instruct the witness to stop answering questions with a legal conclusion after defense counsel had objected.
    3 Appellant’s convictions are against the manifest weight of the evidence; therefore, his convictions are in violation of the Ohio state constitution and the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

    In State Of Ohio v. Demarkco Johnson, 2024-Ohio-5098, No. 113591, Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga (October 24, 2024) resolved the issues on appeal.

    FACTS

    Defendants were charged with two counts of conspiracy, three counts of bribery, eight counts of forgery, one count of insurance fraud, one count of identity fraud, and one count of engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity. They engaged in a pattern of corrupt activity charge included a clause alleging that at least one of the incidents of corrupt activity was a felony of the third degree or higher.

    At trial George Michael Riley, Sr. (“Riley”), testified that he became a confidential source for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”), which was investigating corruption in the East Cleveland Police Department. Special Agent Shaun Roth (“Roth”), an agent with the FBI working with the Cleveland Metropolitan Anti-Corruption Task Force, testified that the FBI executed a search warrant for one of Riley’s properties.

    Harris’s services included running Riley’s name in police databases to check for warrants and blocking off city roads so Riley could move his demolition equipment throughout the city.

    Two of Riley’s trucks were stolen from his business in East Cleveland. Riley told his contacts at the FBI, and FBI officials instructed him to file a police report with the East Cleveland police just as any other victim would do. Riley cooperated with the FBI.

    After hearing the evidence, the jury found Johnson guilty of two counts of bribery, as alleged in Counts 5 and 10 of the indictment. The jury acquitted him of all other charges. The court sentenced Johnson to 12 months in prison on both counts and ordered that the two prison terms be served concurrently. Johnson appealed the trial court’s judgment.

    Law and Analysis - Entrapment Instruction

    In the first assignment of error, Johnson argues the trial court erred in denying his request for a jury instruction on the defense of entrapment.

    Entrapment is a ‘confession and avoidance’ defense in which the defendant admits committing the acts charged but claims that the criminal design arose with the state’s agent. There is no entrapment when government officials merely afford opportunities or facilities for the commission of the offense to a criminal defendant who was predisposed to commit the offense.

    The video evidence showed Johnson handing Riley reports in exchange for money on multiple occasions. Johnson’s conduct demonstrated a ready acquiescence to the inducements offered by the government’s confidential source and a willingness to become involved in criminal activity in exchange for money.

    The evidence showed that Johnson not only had expert knowledge as to how to create the police reports in a way that could go undetected, but he also had access to the blank police forms that made the concealment of the reports possible. The Court of Appeals found that evidence did not support an entrapment defense.

    Testimony Pertaining to Bribery

    In the second assignment of error, Johnson argues the trial court erred by refusing to instruct Roth to refrain from using the word “bribe” or “bribery payment” in response to questions that were not specifically related to bribe payments. Even if Roth had avoided the words “bribe” or “bribery payment,” the outcome of the trial would not have been any different. The overwhelming evidence established that Johnson helped create fake police reports in exchange for money.

    Manifest Weight of the Evidence

    Johnson argued his convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence.

    The Court of Appeals noted that Johnson’s convictions were not dependent on his knowledge of any insurance scheme or Harris’s separate dealings with Riley. His convictions were based solely on his position as a police officer in the East Cleveland Police Department and his acceptance of cash in exchange for police reports. Video evidence showed Johnson accepting cash from Riley in exchange for the reports on at least two occasions. And, despite Johnson’s argument to the contrary, Johnson played along when Harris introduced him to Riley as Nevels.

    CONCLUSION

    The Court of Appeals ordered that a special mandate issue out of the court directing the common pleas court to carry this judgment into execution. The defendant’s conviction having been affirmed, any bail pending appeal is terminated. Case remanded to the trial court for execution of sentence.

    ZALMA OPINION

    There can be no excuse for a police officer to sell information to an insurance criminal to ease the ability of the crime to succeed. Officer Johnson tried multiple arguments to set aside his conviction even though the evidence against him was overwhelming. The Court of Appeals disposed of his arguments quickly and intelligently. Fraud is a crime. Insurance fraud is a crime. Helping the criminal avoid prosecution is also a crime and establishes the officer had given up his honor for cash.

    (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
    Officer Caught Aiding Criminals for Cash Police Officer who took Bribes from Insurance Fraudster Convicted Post 4923 Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/officer-caught-aiding-criminals-cash-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-niboc, see the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4900 posts. Demarkco Johnson (“Johnson”), appealed his convictions and claims the following errors: 1 The trial court abused its discretion in denying appellant’s request for a jury instruction on entrapment. 2 The trial court erred in failing to admonish and/or instruct the witness to stop answering questions with a legal conclusion after defense counsel had objected. 3 Appellant’s convictions are against the manifest weight of the evidence; therefore, his convictions are in violation of the Ohio state constitution and the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. In State Of Ohio v. Demarkco Johnson, 2024-Ohio-5098, No. 113591, Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga (October 24, 2024) resolved the issues on appeal. FACTS Defendants were charged with two counts of conspiracy, three counts of bribery, eight counts of forgery, one count of insurance fraud, one count of identity fraud, and one count of engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity. They engaged in a pattern of corrupt activity charge included a clause alleging that at least one of the incidents of corrupt activity was a felony of the third degree or higher. At trial George Michael Riley, Sr. (“Riley”), testified that he became a confidential source for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”), which was investigating corruption in the East Cleveland Police Department. Special Agent Shaun Roth (“Roth”), an agent with the FBI working with the Cleveland Metropolitan Anti-Corruption Task Force, testified that the FBI executed a search warrant for one of Riley’s properties. Harris’s services included running Riley’s name in police databases to check for warrants and blocking off city roads so Riley could move his demolition equipment throughout the city. Two of Riley’s trucks were stolen from his business in East Cleveland. Riley told his contacts at the FBI, and FBI officials instructed him to file a police report with the East Cleveland police just as any other victim would do. Riley cooperated with the FBI. After hearing the evidence, the jury found Johnson guilty of two counts of bribery, as alleged in Counts 5 and 10 of the indictment. The jury acquitted him of all other charges. The court sentenced Johnson to 12 months in prison on both counts and ordered that the two prison terms be served concurrently. Johnson appealed the trial court’s judgment. Law and Analysis - Entrapment Instruction In the first assignment of error, Johnson argues the trial court erred in denying his request for a jury instruction on the defense of entrapment. Entrapment is a ‘confession and avoidance’ defense in which the defendant admits committing the acts charged but claims that the criminal design arose with the state’s agent. There is no entrapment when government officials merely afford opportunities or facilities for the commission of the offense to a criminal defendant who was predisposed to commit the offense. The video evidence showed Johnson handing Riley reports in exchange for money on multiple occasions. Johnson’s conduct demonstrated a ready acquiescence to the inducements offered by the government’s confidential source and a willingness to become involved in criminal activity in exchange for money. The evidence showed that Johnson not only had expert knowledge as to how to create the police reports in a way that could go undetected, but he also had access to the blank police forms that made the concealment of the reports possible. The Court of Appeals found that evidence did not support an entrapment defense. Testimony Pertaining to Bribery In the second assignment of error, Johnson argues the trial court erred by refusing to instruct Roth to refrain from using the word “bribe” or “bribery payment” in response to questions that were not specifically related to bribe payments. Even if Roth had avoided the words “bribe” or “bribery payment,” the outcome of the trial would not have been any different. The overwhelming evidence established that Johnson helped create fake police reports in exchange for money. Manifest Weight of the Evidence Johnson argued his convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence. The Court of Appeals noted that Johnson’s convictions were not dependent on his knowledge of any insurance scheme or Harris’s separate dealings with Riley. His convictions were based solely on his position as a police officer in the East Cleveland Police Department and his acceptance of cash in exchange for police reports. Video evidence showed Johnson accepting cash from Riley in exchange for the reports on at least two occasions. And, despite Johnson’s argument to the contrary, Johnson played along when Harris introduced him to Riley as Nevels. CONCLUSION The Court of Appeals ordered that a special mandate issue out of the court directing the common pleas court to carry this judgment into execution. The defendant’s conviction having been affirmed, any bail pending appeal is terminated. Case remanded to the trial court for execution of sentence. ZALMA OPINION There can be no excuse for a police officer to sell information to an insurance criminal to ease the ability of the crime to succeed. Officer Johnson tried multiple arguments to set aside his conviction even though the evidence against him was overwhelming. The Court of Appeals disposed of his arguments quickly and intelligently. Fraud is a crime. Insurance fraud is a crime. Helping the criminal avoid prosecution is also a crime and establishes the officer had given up his honor for cash. (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 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos 996 Visualizações

  • Who’s on First & in What Percentage

    Application of Diverse “Other Insurance” Clauses
    Insurers Protected Insured and Litigated Their Differences

    Post 4920

    Two insurance companies- Gemini and Zurich- asked the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal to determine what share of a $2 million settlement each is required to pay. The district court entered judgment for Gemini, ordering that Zurich pay $500,000 plus prejudgment interest. Both parties appealed, with Gemini seeking another $500,000 and Zurich challenging the award of prejudgment interest.

    In Gemini Insurance Company v. Zurich American Insurance Company, No. 22-13495, United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit (October 23, 2024) the competing “other insurance clauses” were resolved.
    FACTS

    After the death of Josue Vallejo, who was struck by a tractor-trailer operated by an employee of FSR Trucking, Inc two of three insurers disputed what proportion of the settlement each should pay. Zurich insured FSR, through its coverage of Commercial, for $1 million. Gemini also insured FSR for $3 million.

    The Vallejo claim settled for $3 million, of which Gemini contributed $2 million. Ryder’s insurance company, which is not a party to this appeal, contributed the other $1 million. Gemini and Zurich agree that they each owe a share of the $2 million, but dispute how much each one must pay. Under Gemini’s theory, they each owe $1 million. Under Zurich’s theory, they each owe their pro rata share, which is $500,000 for Zurich and $1.5 million for Gemini.

    The different theories of coverage turn on the application of the two policies’ “other insurance” clauses, which generally function to apportion coverage when there is overlapping insurance. Gemini argues that its policy is excess to Zurich’s, while Zurich argues that the policies attach at the same level and thus trigger pro rata contribution.

    Gemini sued Zurich for a declaratory judgment in its favor and an award of $1 million plus interest under claims of contractual subrogation or equitable subrogation/contribution. Zurich tendered $500,000 to Gemini to satisfy its pro rata share. Gemini, however, continued to litigate for the other $500,000 plus interest on the entire amount.

    Gemini appealed the District Court’s ruling in favor of Zurich and sought to obtain the other $500,000.

    ANALYSIS

    In Florida, where more than one insurer’s policy provides coverage for a loss, as the parties agree is the case here, it is appropriate to review the insurance contracts to see if the documents address the ‘ranking’ or contribution of other insurers.
    The Other Insurance Clauses

    Gemini’s “other insurance” clause provides: “This insurance is excess over and shall not contribute with any of the other insurance, whether primary, excess, contingent or on any other basis. This condition will not apply to insurance specifically written as excess over this policy.”

    Zurich’s “other insurance” clause is slightly different. “When this Coverage Form and any other Coverage Form or policy covers on the same basis, either excess or primary, we will pay only our share. Our share is the proportion that the Limit of Insurance of our Coverage Form bears to the total of the limits of all the Coverage Forms and policies covering on the same basis.

    Interpretation of the “Other Insurance” Clauses

    Where two insurance policies contain excess insurance clauses the clauses are deemed mutually repugnant and both insurers become primary and share the loss on a pro rata basis in accordance with their policy limits. Zurich argued, and the district court agreed, that both policies contain excess clauses such as pro rata contribution results.

    The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Gemini because when two policies containing conflicting “other insurance” or excess [uninsured/underinsured motorist] clauses.

    In sum an “other insurance” clause containing the phrase “we will pay the proportion of damages payable as excess” means that the clause was pro rata, even though it also characterized itself as an excess clause. Moreover, the Eleventh Circuit concluded both policies were primary.

    The Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court’s resolution of the cross-motions for summary judgment with regard to the amount of contribution and remanded the case for entry of judgment in favor of Gemini for the principal amount of $1,000,000, with the understanding that Zurich has already paid half of that sum. Upon entry of the amended final judgment on remand, Gemini will be the prevailing party. When a verdict liquidates damages on a plaintiff’s out-of-pocket, pecuniary losses, plaintiff is entitled, as a matter of law, to prejudgment interest at the statutory rate from the date of that loss.

    The Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court’s resolution of the cross-motions for summary judgment and remanded for the court to enter judgment in favor of Gemini in the principal amount of $1,000,000 understanding that Zurich has already paid $500,000. It also affirmed the award of prejudgment interest on the first $500,000 and direct the court to award Gemini prejudgment interest on the second $500,000 from February 7, 2019, until the date of the amended final judgment.

    ZALMA OPINION

    The three insurers of the defendant did the right thing by protecting the insured and then resolving their dispute over the share owed in court. Although insurance companies, generally, should not sue each other. “Other Insurance” clauses invariably raise disputes between insurers and often cause hardship to the insured. In this case Gemini, Zurich and an unnamed insurer put up the $3 million to settle and then Gemini and Zurich sued to clarify who owed what. The Eleventh Circuit found that the District Court was wrong because interpreting the competing “other insurance” clauses should have resulted in a finding that both Gemini and Zurich were primary insurers and each owed $1 million of the settlement and Zurich owed Gemini $500,000 plus interest.

    (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
    Who’s on First & in What Percentage Application of Diverse “Other Insurance” Clauses Insurers Protected Insured and Litigated Their Differences Post 4920 Two insurance companies- Gemini and Zurich- asked the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal to determine what share of a $2 million settlement each is required to pay. The district court entered judgment for Gemini, ordering that Zurich pay $500,000 plus prejudgment interest. Both parties appealed, with Gemini seeking another $500,000 and Zurich challenging the award of prejudgment interest. In Gemini Insurance Company v. Zurich American Insurance Company, No. 22-13495, United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit (October 23, 2024) the competing “other insurance clauses” were resolved. FACTS After the death of Josue Vallejo, who was struck by a tractor-trailer operated by an employee of FSR Trucking, Inc two of three insurers disputed what proportion of the settlement each should pay. Zurich insured FSR, through its coverage of Commercial, for $1 million. Gemini also insured FSR for $3 million. The Vallejo claim settled for $3 million, of which Gemini contributed $2 million. Ryder’s insurance company, which is not a party to this appeal, contributed the other $1 million. Gemini and Zurich agree that they each owe a share of the $2 million, but dispute how much each one must pay. Under Gemini’s theory, they each owe $1 million. Under Zurich’s theory, they each owe their pro rata share, which is $500,000 for Zurich and $1.5 million for Gemini. The different theories of coverage turn on the application of the two policies’ “other insurance” clauses, which generally function to apportion coverage when there is overlapping insurance. Gemini argues that its policy is excess to Zurich’s, while Zurich argues that the policies attach at the same level and thus trigger pro rata contribution. Gemini sued Zurich for a declaratory judgment in its favor and an award of $1 million plus interest under claims of contractual subrogation or equitable subrogation/contribution. Zurich tendered $500,000 to Gemini to satisfy its pro rata share. Gemini, however, continued to litigate for the other $500,000 plus interest on the entire amount. Gemini appealed the District Court’s ruling in favor of Zurich and sought to obtain the other $500,000. ANALYSIS In Florida, where more than one insurer’s policy provides coverage for a loss, as the parties agree is the case here, it is appropriate to review the insurance contracts to see if the documents address the ‘ranking’ or contribution of other insurers. The Other Insurance Clauses Gemini’s “other insurance” clause provides: “This insurance is excess over and shall not contribute with any of the other insurance, whether primary, excess, contingent or on any other basis. This condition will not apply to insurance specifically written as excess over this policy.” Zurich’s “other insurance” clause is slightly different. “When this Coverage Form and any other Coverage Form or policy covers on the same basis, either excess or primary, we will pay only our share. Our share is the proportion that the Limit of Insurance of our Coverage Form bears to the total of the limits of all the Coverage Forms and policies covering on the same basis. Interpretation of the “Other Insurance” Clauses Where two insurance policies contain excess insurance clauses the clauses are deemed mutually repugnant and both insurers become primary and share the loss on a pro rata basis in accordance with their policy limits. Zurich argued, and the district court agreed, that both policies contain excess clauses such as pro rata contribution results. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Gemini because when two policies containing conflicting “other insurance” or excess [uninsured/underinsured motorist] clauses. In sum an “other insurance” clause containing the phrase “we will pay the proportion of damages payable as excess” means that the clause was pro rata, even though it also characterized itself as an excess clause. Moreover, the Eleventh Circuit concluded both policies were primary. The Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court’s resolution of the cross-motions for summary judgment with regard to the amount of contribution and remanded the case for entry of judgment in favor of Gemini for the principal amount of $1,000,000, with the understanding that Zurich has already paid half of that sum. Upon entry of the amended final judgment on remand, Gemini will be the prevailing party. When a verdict liquidates damages on a plaintiff’s out-of-pocket, pecuniary losses, plaintiff is entitled, as a matter of law, to prejudgment interest at the statutory rate from the date of that loss. The Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court’s resolution of the cross-motions for summary judgment and remanded for the court to enter judgment in favor of Gemini in the principal amount of $1,000,000 understanding that Zurich has already paid $500,000. It also affirmed the award of prejudgment interest on the first $500,000 and direct the court to award Gemini prejudgment interest on the second $500,000 from February 7, 2019, until the date of the amended final judgment. ZALMA OPINION The three insurers of the defendant did the right thing by protecting the insured and then resolving their dispute over the share owed in court. Although insurance companies, generally, should not sue each other. “Other Insurance” clauses invariably raise disputes between insurers and often cause hardship to the insured. In this case Gemini, Zurich and an unnamed insurer put up the $3 million to settle and then Gemini and Zurich sued to clarify who owed what. The Eleventh Circuit found that the District Court was wrong because interpreting the competing “other insurance” clauses should have resulted in a finding that both Gemini and Zurich were primary insurers and each owed $1 million of the settlement and Zurich owed Gemini $500,000 plus interest. (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
    BARRYZALMA.SUBSTACK.COM
    Subscribe to Excellence in Claims Handling
    A series of writings and/or videos to help understand insurance, insurance claims, and becoming an insurance claims professional and who need to provide or receive competent and Excellence in Claims Handling. Click to read Excellence in Claims Handling, by Barry Zalma, a Substack publication with thousands of subscribers.
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos 752 Visualizações

  • Charges dropped against 50 Freedom Convoy-inspired truckers - LifeSite
    #NoMoreLiberalsAndNDP
    #SayingTheQuietPartOutLoud
    #resigntrudeau
    #JustSayNoMore
    https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/charges-dropped-against-50-freedom-convoy-inspired-truckers
    Charges dropped against 50 Freedom Convoy-inspired truckers - LifeSite 🇨🇦 #NoMoreLiberalsAndNDP 🇨🇦 🇨🇦 #SayingTheQuietPartOutLoud 🇨🇦 🇨🇦 #resigntrudeau 🇨🇦 🇨🇦 #JustSayNoMore 🇨🇦 https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/charges-dropped-against-50-freedom-convoy-inspired-truckers
    WWW.LIFESITENEWS.COM
    Charges dropped against 50 Freedom Convoy-inspired truckers - LifeSite
    According to The Democracy Fund, 50 truckers who protested COVID mandates by participating in the 2022 Freedom Convoy blockade protests at the Canadian-U.S. border have seen their tickets dropped.
    Like
    1
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos 150 Visualizações
  • ...GET THEM ALL,.. GET THEM TO GITMO,... WATERBOARD THEM,... HANG THEM,... TAKE THEM "DEEP SEA FISHING"!!!!! GO!!!!!!!!....
    https://www.naturalnews.com/2024-10-16-usps-trucks-counterfeit-ballots-election-2020-lawsuit.html
    ...GET THEM ALL,.. GET THEM TO GITMO,... WATERBOARD THEM,... HANG THEM,... TAKE THEM "DEEP SEA FISHING"!!!!! GO!!!!!!!!.... https://www.naturalnews.com/2024-10-16-usps-trucks-counterfeit-ballots-election-2020-lawsuit.html
    WWW.NATURALNEWS.COM
    U.S. Postal Service refusing to disclose who paid for nine trucks that transferred up to 1.5 million counterfeit election ballots in 2020 – NaturalNews.com
    A federal court is about to force the United States Postal Service (USPS) to fess up about who was behind those infamous nine trucks in Pennsylvania that transferred upwards of 1.5 million counterfeit ballots during the 2020 election, effectively throwing the state for Joe Biden. Rasmussen Reports shared the following video update from Patrick Byrne […]
    Like
    Angry
    2
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos 337 Visualizações
  • ...GET THEM ALL,.. GET THEM TO GITMO,... WATERBOARD THEM,... HANG THEM,... TAKE THEM "DEEP SEA FISHING"!!!!! GO!!!!!!!!....
    https://www.naturalnews.com/2024-10-16-usps-trucks-counterfeit-ballots-election-2020-lawsuit.html
    ...GET THEM ALL,.. GET THEM TO GITMO,... WATERBOARD THEM,... HANG THEM,... TAKE THEM "DEEP SEA FISHING"!!!!! GO!!!!!!!!.... https://www.naturalnews.com/2024-10-16-usps-trucks-counterfeit-ballots-election-2020-lawsuit.html
    WWW.NATURALNEWS.COM
    U.S. Postal Service refusing to disclose who paid for nine trucks that transferred up to 1.5 million counterfeit election ballots in 2020 – NaturalNews.com
    A federal court is about to force the United States Postal Service (USPS) to fess up about who was behind those infamous nine trucks in Pennsylvania that transferred upwards of 1.5 million counterfeit ballots during the 2020 election, effectively throwing the state for Joe Biden. Rasmussen Reports shared the following video update from Patrick Byrne […]
    Angry
    1
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos 327 Visualizações
  • https://thewashingtonstandard.com/breaking-magazine-ban-permanently-struck-down-ruled-unconstitutional-appeals-court-weighs-in-video/
    https://thewashingtonstandard.com/breaking-magazine-ban-permanently-struck-down-ruled-unconstitutional-appeals-court-weighs-in-video/
    THEWASHINGTONSTANDARD.COM
    BREAKING! Magazine Ban Permanently Struck Down & Ruled Unconstitutional! Appeals Court Weighs In! (Video) - The Washington Standard
    In this video, Armed Scholar breaks down a win against a state’s permit requirement & magazine ban which was struck down. Now a critical hearing will take place! Article posted with permission from Guns in the News
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos 241 Visualizações
  • https://gunsinthenews.com/breaking-magazine-ban-permanently-struck-down-ruled-unconstitutional-appeals-court-weighs-in-video/
    https://gunsinthenews.com/breaking-magazine-ban-permanently-struck-down-ruled-unconstitutional-appeals-court-weighs-in-video/
    GUNSINTHENEWS.COM
    BREAKING! Magazine Ban Permanently Struck Down & Ruled Unconstitutional! Appeals Court Weighs In! (Video) - Guns in the News
    In this video, Armed Scholar breaks down a win against a state’s permit requirement & magazine ban which was struck down. Now a critical hearing will take place! Don't forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
    0 Comentários 0 Compartilhamentos 258 Visualizações
Páginas Impulsionadas
Patrocinado

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