• 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 779 Views
  • Internet disruptions affect routine life, causing financial loss and online services. The outages are linked to the ongoing protests over University Students. internet disruptions have made it almost impossible to find responsable for what going on. After have common citizens damage on their every day work. Freelancers, small enterprises, and gig workers are particularly vulnerable. Economic Strain: Entire sectors, like e-commerce and digital market, are hindered, contributing to broader economic instability.
    Internet disruptions affect routine life, causing financial loss and online services. The outages are linked to the ongoing protests over University Students. internet disruptions have made it almost impossible to find responsable for what going on. After have common citizens damage on their every day work. Freelancers, small enterprises, and gig workers are particularly vulnerable. Economic Strain: Entire sectors, like e-commerce and digital market, are hindered, contributing to broader economic instability.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 371 Views

  • Everything is tied to it. Skills integrate and flow together in a way that all of it helps develop your character. I'm not sure any other game can do this better than Runescape and it's likely to be beneficial, considering that because an experience that's been in existence for as long as Runescape has to have a motive for its longevity in the category. Its Ironman mode is a great new feature in an old game. Long may it last.

    Old school RuneScape players who want to earn new skins and cosmetics through slogging across the classic game's contents can begin doing so today, when the game launches the brand new Quest Speedrunning Worlds. The server is an entirely distinct members-only variant of the game that has specific rules and restrictions.

    In order to begin a speedrunning session participants will have to choose a challenge upon logging on to the server. This quest they'll need to finish as quickly as they can. To ensure fairness in the competition the character's level will be automatically adapted to the appropriate level for the quest chosen. The quests will only be available when the game launches and ten more will be added in the coming five months.

    Points and awards for Speedrunning are given based on the speed at which the quest can be completed. These points can be used to purchase a variety of cosmetic and reward items, such as Adventurer's Outfits with different tiers, Speedy Teleport Scrolls, and the Giant Stopwatch item. Quest Speedrunning World is open! Quest Speedrunning World is officially in operation as of this writing to those who wish to tackle the challenge. "Quest Speedrunning Worlds open. Go to the Quest Speedrunning World and smash those bars!" Jagex tweeted. "Show us your fastest times, but above all else, enjoy yourself!"

    Jagex revealed today as part of the 300 million account celebrations, they'll launch Fresh Start servers for RuneScape and Old School RuneScape on September 12th for RS3 and in October for OSRS. The name suggests that they'll be completely new servers on which players can begin from scratch in the same way as all other players. The servers that are fresh starts are only available for a certain period of time (4 months) and characters will be moved to normal servers following the duration of the event.

    RuneScape Fresh Start Worlds are set to be available for four months which will allow players to revisit RuneScape in a group as they go back to iconic cities, unforgettable quests, zones of improvement and boss fights and all of them with increased gaming boosts and XP. Players can return to the main game at any time, with their newly-levelled character as well as their abundant rewards, which include new clothing and pet skins, as well as alternative capes for skill and rare tradeable rewards. For those who are competitive, they can also take advantage of an eight-week competition focusing on high scores and world-firsts.

    Old School RuneScape Fresh Start Worlds will be launched in October, and will offer players an exciting challenge and chance. In contrast to RuneScape, Old School Fresh Start Worlds won't get the XP boost, meaning players must depend on their own wits to make progress. It will provide players with the exact Old School RuneScape experience players are familiar with, but they'll be stepping into the world of new economic system and high scores waiting to be earned. Six months after the launchdate, players will be able to have their avatars transferred to an official game server in order to ensure that they can play for many years to the future.
    Rsorder.com: The most professional site to Buy OSRS Gold/RS3 Gold, items, accounts, power leveling, and questing services.
    Everything is tied to it. Skills integrate and flow together in a way that all of it helps develop your character. I'm not sure any other game can do this better than Runescape and it's likely to be beneficial, considering that because an experience that's been in existence for as long as Runescape has to have a motive for its longevity in the category. Its Ironman mode is a great new feature in an old game. Long may it last. Old school RuneScape players who want to earn new skins and cosmetics through slogging across the classic game's contents can begin doing so today, when the game launches the brand new Quest Speedrunning Worlds. The server is an entirely distinct members-only variant of the game that has specific rules and restrictions. In order to begin a speedrunning session participants will have to choose a challenge upon logging on to the server. This quest they'll need to finish as quickly as they can. To ensure fairness in the competition the character's level will be automatically adapted to the appropriate level for the quest chosen. The quests will only be available when the game launches and ten more will be added in the coming five months. Points and awards for Speedrunning are given based on the speed at which the quest can be completed. These points can be used to purchase a variety of cosmetic and reward items, such as Adventurer's Outfits with different tiers, Speedy Teleport Scrolls, and the Giant Stopwatch item. Quest Speedrunning World is open! Quest Speedrunning World is officially in operation as of this writing to those who wish to tackle the challenge. "Quest Speedrunning Worlds open. Go to the Quest Speedrunning World and smash those bars!" Jagex tweeted. "Show us your fastest times, but above all else, enjoy yourself!" Jagex revealed today as part of the 300 million account celebrations, they'll launch Fresh Start servers for RuneScape and Old School RuneScape on September 12th for RS3 and in October for OSRS. The name suggests that they'll be completely new servers on which players can begin from scratch in the same way as all other players. The servers that are fresh starts are only available for a certain period of time (4 months) and characters will be moved to normal servers following the duration of the event. RuneScape Fresh Start Worlds are set to be available for four months which will allow players to revisit RuneScape in a group as they go back to iconic cities, unforgettable quests, zones of improvement and boss fights and all of them with increased gaming boosts and XP. Players can return to the main game at any time, with their newly-levelled character as well as their abundant rewards, which include new clothing and pet skins, as well as alternative capes for skill and rare tradeable rewards. For those who are competitive, they can also take advantage of an eight-week competition focusing on high scores and world-firsts. Old School RuneScape Fresh Start Worlds will be launched in October, and will offer players an exciting challenge and chance. In contrast to RuneScape, Old School Fresh Start Worlds won't get the XP boost, meaning players must depend on their own wits to make progress. It will provide players with the exact Old School RuneScape experience players are familiar with, but they'll be stepping into the world of new economic system and high scores waiting to be earned. Six months after the launchdate, players will be able to have their avatars transferred to an official game server in order to ensure that they can play for many years to the future. Rsorder.com: The most professional site to Buy OSRS Gold/RS3 Gold, items, accounts, power leveling, and questing services.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 767 Views
  • Israel's worldwide targeting program using emergency services connect the dots to how they pulled off COVID worldwide https://old.bitchute.com/video/1ZGVQjXgyTpz/
    Israel's worldwide targeting program using emergency services connect the dots to how they pulled off COVID worldwide https://old.bitchute.com/video/1ZGVQjXgyTpz/
    OLD.BITCHUTE.COM
    synagogue of Satan using emergency services connect the dots to how they pulled off COVID worldwide
    We will divide society so that 1/3 are spies and informers that will keep the rest under observation - https://www.bitchute.com/video/fWwofFr9uQsG/ --- They messed up big time Israel the synagogue of satan's worldwide targeting list https://old.bi…
    0 Comments 0 Shares 180 Views

  • Lose if You Fail to Respond to Motion for Summary Disposition

    INSURERS FIND FRAUDSTERS ARE OFTEN INCOMPETENT

    Post 4943

    Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/lose-you-fail-respond-motion-summary-disposition-zalma-esq-cfe-rhstc, see the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4900 posts.

    In Chris Kallco v. Melissa Lynn Pugh, Chris Kallco, and Precise MRI Of Michigan, LLC v. Citizens Insurance Company Of The Midwest and Melissa Lynn Pugh, No. 368156, Court of Appeals of Michigan (October 30, 2024) the Court of Appeals resolved the dispute.

    In a consolidated first-party and third-party no-fault action, plaintiff appealed from two orders granting summary disposition in favor of defendants, including the fraud of the plaintiff.

    FACTUAL BACKGROUND

    After a motor vehicle accident involving plaintiff and Pugh. Plaintiff alleged that he sustained injuries from the accident. A year after the accident, plaintiff brought a negligence claim against Pugh, alleging that, because of Pugh’s negligence, plaintiff sustained “severe permanent and progressive personal injuries and serious impairment of a body function, including but not necessarily limited to: Head, Neck, Back, Shoulders ….” Plaintiff also brought a claim against Citizens for PIP benefits, including medical expenses, work loss, and replacement services.

    Pugh moved for summary disposition arguing that plaintiff could not meet his burden of showing that he sustained a threshold injury under the no-fault act and, therefore, he could not maintain his negligence claim against her.

    Shortly after Pugh filed her motion, Citizens filed its own motion arguing that plaintiff made material misrepresentations to Citizens regarding the extent of his injuries, which rendered him ineligible for benefits under the statute.

    The trial court concluded that plaintiff failed to establish that he sustained a serious impairment of body function and therefore summary disposition in favor of Pugh was appropriate.

    With regard to Citizens’ motion, the trial court found “that absolutely no genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether Plaintiff knowingly made numerous materially false statements in his claims for PIP benefits relative to his alleged injuries and physical restrictions” arising out of the car accident.

    THRESHOLD INJURY

    Plaintiff argued that the trial court erred by finding that there was no genuine issue of material fact regarding whether plaintiff met the serious-impairment threshold. However, plaintiff’s failure to respond to the motion for summary disposition made it impossible for him to support his argument.

    The Plaintiff tried to use the defendants evidence as support against the motions. The attempt failed. The objectively manifested requirement means that plaintiffs must introduce evidence that generally requires medical testimony. Pugh presented objective medical records indicating that there was no physical basis for plaintiff’s subjective complaints of pain. Plaintiff’s deposition testimony only set forth mere subjective complaints of pain.

    Because plaintiff cannot show a factual dispute as to whether he suffered an objectively manifested impairment, he failed to satisfy the threshold serious-impairment requirement.

    FRAUDULENT INSURANCE ACT

    A person who presents or causes to be presented an oral or written statement, including computer-generated information, as part of or in support of a claim for payment or another benefit knowing that the statement contains false information concerning a fact or thing material to the claim commits a fraudulent insurance act that is subject to the penalties imposed by statute.

    An individual commits a “fraudulent insurance act” when:

    1 the person presents or causes to be presented an oral or written statement,
    2 the statement is part of or in support of a claim for no-fault benefits, and
    3 the claim for benefits was submitted to the to the insurer or the state, further,
    4 the person must have known that the statement contained false information, and
    5 the statement concerned a fact or thing material to the claim.

    As to both motions for summary disposition, plaintiff failed to show that any genuine issue of material facts exists. Accordingly, the trial court did not err by granting summary disposition in favor of defendants.

    ZALMA OPINION

    As I get older the competence of those who attempt to defraud insurers gets less and less competent. Kallco is an example of the lack of competence. He claimed all kinds of injuries and inability to work or play with his children and, when faced with a competent defense, he ignored the motions, failed to respond, and when he lost he appealed claiming the motions against him gave enough evidence to raise a issue of fact. What a waste of the court’s time and I must ask why, with such convincing evidence, no criminal charges were brought.

    (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

    Sorry about the delay in posting. I’m recovering from pneumonia and spending most of the last week in bed with pills, Kleenex, coughing and sleep which I couldn’t get in the hospital. Should be act in shape next week but doctors make no promises.
    Lose if You Fail to Respond to Motion for Summary Disposition INSURERS FIND FRAUDSTERS ARE OFTEN INCOMPETENT Post 4943 Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/lose-you-fail-respond-motion-summary-disposition-zalma-esq-cfe-rhstc, see the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4900 posts. In Chris Kallco v. Melissa Lynn Pugh, Chris Kallco, and Precise MRI Of Michigan, LLC v. Citizens Insurance Company Of The Midwest and Melissa Lynn Pugh, No. 368156, Court of Appeals of Michigan (October 30, 2024) the Court of Appeals resolved the dispute. In a consolidated first-party and third-party no-fault action, plaintiff appealed from two orders granting summary disposition in favor of defendants, including the fraud of the plaintiff. FACTUAL BACKGROUND After a motor vehicle accident involving plaintiff and Pugh. Plaintiff alleged that he sustained injuries from the accident. A year after the accident, plaintiff brought a negligence claim against Pugh, alleging that, because of Pugh’s negligence, plaintiff sustained “severe permanent and progressive personal injuries and serious impairment of a body function, including but not necessarily limited to: Head, Neck, Back, Shoulders ….” Plaintiff also brought a claim against Citizens for PIP benefits, including medical expenses, work loss, and replacement services. Pugh moved for summary disposition arguing that plaintiff could not meet his burden of showing that he sustained a threshold injury under the no-fault act and, therefore, he could not maintain his negligence claim against her. Shortly after Pugh filed her motion, Citizens filed its own motion arguing that plaintiff made material misrepresentations to Citizens regarding the extent of his injuries, which rendered him ineligible for benefits under the statute. The trial court concluded that plaintiff failed to establish that he sustained a serious impairment of body function and therefore summary disposition in favor of Pugh was appropriate. With regard to Citizens’ motion, the trial court found “that absolutely no genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether Plaintiff knowingly made numerous materially false statements in his claims for PIP benefits relative to his alleged injuries and physical restrictions” arising out of the car accident. THRESHOLD INJURY Plaintiff argued that the trial court erred by finding that there was no genuine issue of material fact regarding whether plaintiff met the serious-impairment threshold. However, plaintiff’s failure to respond to the motion for summary disposition made it impossible for him to support his argument. The Plaintiff tried to use the defendants evidence as support against the motions. The attempt failed. The objectively manifested requirement means that plaintiffs must introduce evidence that generally requires medical testimony. Pugh presented objective medical records indicating that there was no physical basis for plaintiff’s subjective complaints of pain. Plaintiff’s deposition testimony only set forth mere subjective complaints of pain. Because plaintiff cannot show a factual dispute as to whether he suffered an objectively manifested impairment, he failed to satisfy the threshold serious-impairment requirement. FRAUDULENT INSURANCE ACT A person who presents or causes to be presented an oral or written statement, including computer-generated information, as part of or in support of a claim for payment or another benefit knowing that the statement contains false information concerning a fact or thing material to the claim commits a fraudulent insurance act that is subject to the penalties imposed by statute. An individual commits a “fraudulent insurance act” when: 1 the person presents or causes to be presented an oral or written statement, 2 the statement is part of or in support of a claim for no-fault benefits, and 3 the claim for benefits was submitted to the to the insurer or the state, further, 4 the person must have known that the statement contained false information, and 5 the statement concerned a fact or thing material to the claim. As to both motions for summary disposition, plaintiff failed to show that any genuine issue of material facts exists. Accordingly, the trial court did not err by granting summary disposition in favor of defendants. ZALMA OPINION As I get older the competence of those who attempt to defraud insurers gets less and less competent. Kallco is an example of the lack of competence. He claimed all kinds of injuries and inability to work or play with his children and, when faced with a competent defense, he ignored the motions, failed to respond, and when he lost he appealed claiming the motions against him gave enough evidence to raise a issue of fact. What a waste of the court’s time and I must ask why, with such convincing evidence, no criminal charges were brought. (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 Sorry about the delay in posting. I’m recovering from pneumonia and spending most of the last week in bed with pills, Kleenex, coughing and sleep which I couldn’t get in the hospital. Should be act in shape next week but doctors make no promises.
    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

  • The new strategy is known as "chucking" which involves placing massive sums of GP on a 1v1 duel typically requiring an intermediary to pay the winnings padded to the person who won the duel. In recent times there have cases where one person will fight for another to get a share of the prize pool which is overinflated.

    "As you're aware the primary reason behind the removal of the Duel Arena was to stop an activity that we considered to be incompatible to our regulations," said Jagex. "However we've observed that since the advent of the PvP Arena the rule-breaking activities have been adapted to. They are essentially akin to 'commission stakestaking' and are becoming more common in previous inhabitants within Duel Arena." Duel Arena."

    "We need to be explicit: community chucking regardless of whether you are hosting or taking part it is not permitted and is in violation of rules of the Games of Chance section of our Game Rules," warned the studio. "This is the case regardless of whether the host gets tips or not. Also, any staking, or dueling that is done with the help of a middleman is prohibited. We will pursue people and accounts who are involved in staking or throwing."

    Another form of activity Jagex warns of is against the game's terms of service are giveaways that re-roll. "A Re-roll giveaway is an event where participants are invited to participate, usually for cost, to have the chance of winning some prize. After a certain number of participants have registered and the host has decided to select an unlucky winner out of the pool of entries," the studio explained. "After the winner is selected the viewers are occasionally encouraged to make the host a donation or tip, usually in the form real-world money - in order to roll the results of the "giveaway'. It can be repeated any number of times as well as a potential infinite number of replays."

    "These kinds of giveaways are not permitted because they are in violation of the rules laid out under the Real World Trading section. The hosts of these kinds of giveaways will continue to face disciplinary action against them. Giveaways can only be accepted when they are managed with good intentions, with basic mechanics, and are accessible to all," the studio maintained.

    One of the changes that are coming into RuneScape in the coming year will be the death mechanic that has been promised modification that will drastically cut down the costs of dying within the traditional MMORPG. Traditionally dying in Gielinor meant you lost everything you owned, with the exception of those that you were protected from dying. It was extremely frustrating and expensive, however it also helped to keep the economy stable and costs in the right place.

    Fast forward nearly a decade and the gold sink that is caused due to the loss of objects upon death isn't as important as it was in the past. This led to the conclusion that it was time to alter the death mechanics so that it makes it more lenient, particularly for those with the right equipment, who are more likely to lose important items.

    After the updated death system is in place all items that are added to the death system will be charged a minimum mortality cost, which is 0.1 percent. This change will reduce the cost of reclaiming some items by as much as 80 percent, and for others by as high as 96.7 percent. Parties will no longer be required to sell their possessions to retrieve the items left behind by their fallen friends. To counteract the massive decrease in the cost of death and its impact on the game's econometrics, Jagex will be adding 2 percent tax to all transactions that exceed 50 coins.
    Rsorder.com: The most professional site to Buy OSRS Gold/RS3 Gold, items, accounts, power leveling, and questing services.
    The new strategy is known as "chucking" which involves placing massive sums of GP on a 1v1 duel typically requiring an intermediary to pay the winnings padded to the person who won the duel. In recent times there have cases where one person will fight for another to get a share of the prize pool which is overinflated. "As you're aware the primary reason behind the removal of the Duel Arena was to stop an activity that we considered to be incompatible to our regulations," said Jagex. "However we've observed that since the advent of the PvP Arena the rule-breaking activities have been adapted to. They are essentially akin to 'commission stakestaking' and are becoming more common in previous inhabitants within Duel Arena." Duel Arena." "We need to be explicit: community chucking regardless of whether you are hosting or taking part it is not permitted and is in violation of rules of the Games of Chance section of our Game Rules," warned the studio. "This is the case regardless of whether the host gets tips or not. Also, any staking, or dueling that is done with the help of a middleman is prohibited. We will pursue people and accounts who are involved in staking or throwing." Another form of activity Jagex warns of is against the game's terms of service are giveaways that re-roll. "A Re-roll giveaway is an event where participants are invited to participate, usually for cost, to have the chance of winning some prize. After a certain number of participants have registered and the host has decided to select an unlucky winner out of the pool of entries," the studio explained. "After the winner is selected the viewers are occasionally encouraged to make the host a donation or tip, usually in the form real-world money - in order to roll the results of the "giveaway'. It can be repeated any number of times as well as a potential infinite number of replays." "These kinds of giveaways are not permitted because they are in violation of the rules laid out under the Real World Trading section. The hosts of these kinds of giveaways will continue to face disciplinary action against them. Giveaways can only be accepted when they are managed with good intentions, with basic mechanics, and are accessible to all," the studio maintained. One of the changes that are coming into RuneScape in the coming year will be the death mechanic that has been promised modification that will drastically cut down the costs of dying within the traditional MMORPG. Traditionally dying in Gielinor meant you lost everything you owned, with the exception of those that you were protected from dying. It was extremely frustrating and expensive, however it also helped to keep the economy stable and costs in the right place. Fast forward nearly a decade and the gold sink that is caused due to the loss of objects upon death isn't as important as it was in the past. This led to the conclusion that it was time to alter the death mechanics so that it makes it more lenient, particularly for those with the right equipment, who are more likely to lose important items. After the updated death system is in place all items that are added to the death system will be charged a minimum mortality cost, which is 0.1 percent. This change will reduce the cost of reclaiming some items by as much as 80 percent, and for others by as high as 96.7 percent. Parties will no longer be required to sell their possessions to retrieve the items left behind by their fallen friends. To counteract the massive decrease in the cost of death and its impact on the game's econometrics, Jagex will be adding 2 percent tax to all transactions that exceed 50 coins. Rsorder.com: The most professional site to Buy OSRS Gold/RS3 Gold, items, accounts, power leveling, and questing services.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 956 Views
  • https://www.newenglishreview.org/white-british-students-not-allowed-to-apply-for-security-services-internship/
    https://www.newenglishreview.org/white-british-students-not-allowed-to-apply-for-security-services-internship/
    WWW.NEWENGLISHREVIEW.ORG
    White British students not allowed to apply for security services internship
    Decision described as ‘blatant discrimination’ and ‘racist’ as MI5, MI6 and GCHQ try to increase diversity among their ranks. We have a fifth column within the Home Office and Ministry
    0 Comments 0 Shares 224 Views
  • It is improbable to think that this virus naturally spread globally at a rapid speed. All the COVID vaccine manufacturers took a major hit in the markets on the very day that Trump announced he was hiring Robert F. Kennedy to head the Department of Health and Human Services. Will they ever release the ingredients in the actual vaccine? Will those who demanded lockdowns, masking, and distancing without evidence face their day in court? Justice has NOT been served, and one can hope that those responsible will be prosecuted. The upside is that people have lost all trust in “the science” and are beginning to think independently.
    https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/disease/majority-of-americans-will-not-take-updated-covid-vax/
    It is improbable to think that this virus naturally spread globally at a rapid speed. All the COVID vaccine manufacturers took a major hit in the markets on the very day that Trump announced he was hiring Robert F. Kennedy to head the Department of Health and Human Services. Will they ever release the ingredients in the actual vaccine? Will those who demanded lockdowns, masking, and distancing without evidence face their day in court? Justice has NOT been served, and one can hope that those responsible will be prosecuted. The upside is that people have lost all trust in “the science” and are beginning to think independently. https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/disease/majority-of-americans-will-not-take-updated-covid-vax/
    0 Comments 0 Shares 776 Views
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