Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > Political Forums > Law & Order
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Law & Order Discuss Judge: $575M settlement rejected for 9/11 'heroes' at the Political Forums; Originally Posted by Stinger Yes it does and the two parties came to a settlement over how much it would ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 03-25-2010, 10:12 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,619
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,310 Times in 9,281 Posts
Post Re: Judge: $575M settlement rejected for 9/11 'heroes'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger View Post
Yes it does and the two parties came to a settlement over how much it would take to provide the medical treatments.
Why do you think the judge has a say in it at all?
I mean, BY LAW, he does get a say in it.
Do you get that?

It was not a fair settlement. Reasons previously explained.
Ergo, rejected.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
So what expertise and knowledge did he have to trump the settlement the two sides agreed on?
His reasoning has already been explained.
You ignored it...
Hellerstein laid out a number of proposed fixes for what he saw as deficiencies in the settlement and told the two sides to resume negotiations.

He rejected the idea that a third or more of the money should go to the plaintiffs' lawyers and said the legal fees should be paid by the WTC Captive, not the workers.

Hellerstein said workers should have ample opportunities to ask questions and get answers about the settlement, and he offered to go on a mini-speaking tour to get information to the plaintiffs.

"I will make myself available in union halls, fire department houses, police precincts and schools," Hellerstein said.

He said more money should be set aside for people who later develop cancer that may be linked to ground zero toxins. He said he wanted to retain ultimate control over which workers were entitled to have claims paid.
http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/law...-heroes-2.html


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
And once again you post lies I cited for the article the only reason the judge gave, he talked to two plaintiffs and just decided they needed more.
You accuse me of lying as I have already demonstrated you are lying.
You claim "the only reason the judge gave", but I have now posted TWICE ADDITIONAL REASONS that the judge gave...
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 03-28-2010, 07:55 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,439
Thanks: 163
Thanked 541 Times in 452 Posts
Default Re: Judge: $575M settlement rejected for 9/11 'heroes'

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
Why do you think the judge has a say in it at all?
I mean, BY LAW, he does get a say in it.
What law did he say was violated? None,. Which party had filed a motion to dismiss the suit because they didn't think it was enough? Neither it was their settlement.

The settlement had been reached by all parties and he gave no valid reason to toss it other than he didn't like it and that for unstated reasons, other than he just thought it should be more, said they needed to pay out more money.

Well here's a little news for you.

NEW YORK -- Of all the illnesses people fear might be caused by toxic dust from the World Trade Center, nothing scares people like cancer.

Hundreds of people are suing New York City over cancer diagnoses they received after working at ground zero. A judge last week rejected a $575 million legal settlement for thousands of sick 9/11 responders in part because he thought it should contain more money for cancer victims.

Yet, statistics show that cancer rates among those who worked in trade center rubble are in line with rates among the general public.

The three major research efforts tracking the health of ground zero responders have so far failed to turn up evidence linking any type of cancer to the dust.
washingtonpost.com
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 03-29-2010, 10:19 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,619
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,310 Times in 9,281 Posts
Post Re: Judge: $575M settlement rejected for 9/11 'heroes'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger View Post
What law did he say was violated? None,.

What is it with you and pointless observations?

He does not have to have a law violated.
The judge DOES have to put his agreement to the settlement.
Do you really think he just rubber stamps it?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
Which party had filed a motion to dismiss the suit because they didn't think it was enough? Neither it was their settlement.
Irrelevant.
The judge acted wisely and in accordance with his power on the case.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
The settlement had been reached by all parties and he gave no valid reason to toss it other than he didn't like it and that for unstated reasons, other than he just thought it should be more, said they needed to pay out more money.
As usual, you lie...
Hellerstein laid out a number of proposed fixes for what he saw as deficiencies in the settlement and told the two sides to resume negotiations.

He rejected the idea that a third or more of the money should go to the plaintiffs' lawyers and said the legal fees should be paid by the WTC Captive, not the workers.

Hellerstein said workers should have ample opportunities to ask questions and get answers about the settlement, and he offered to go on a mini-speaking tour to get information to the plaintiffs.

"I will make myself available in union halls, fire department houses, police precincts and schools," Hellerstein said.

He said more money should be set aside for people who later develop cancer that may be linked to ground zero toxins. He said he wanted to retain ultimate control over which workers were entitled to have claims paid.
http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/law...-heroes-2.html


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
Well here's a little news for you.
NEW YORK -- Of all the illnesses people fear might be caused by toxic dust from the World Trade Center, nothing scares people like cancer.
Hundreds of people are suing New York City over cancer diagnoses they received after working at ground zero. A judge last week rejected a $575 million legal settlement for thousands of sick 9/11 responders in part because he thought it should contain more money for cancer victims.
Yet, statistics show that cancer rates among those who worked in trade center rubble are in line with rates among the general public.
From the article: "He said more money should be set aside for people who later develop cancer that may be linked to ground zero toxins."
If you think that we should blindly assume that all the cancer cases have revealed themselves, then you're just setting up these police, firefighters, and other workers who helped to save lives after 9/11 up for trouble.

Part of the WHOLE PURPOSE of this is to make sure that we set aside adequate money to pay for their future medical expenses. And you want to pretend there is no problem.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 03-29-2010, 02:30 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,439
Thanks: 163
Thanked 541 Times in 452 Posts
Default Re: Judge: $575M settlement rejected for 9/11 'heroes'

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post

What is it with you and pointless observations?

He does not have to have a law violated.
The judge DOES have to put his agreement to the settlement.
Do you really think he just rubber stamps it?
If both parties agree to it he better have a damn good reason not to.

You haven't shown that he has.

Quote:
The judge acted wisely
You've yet to show it.

Quote:
As usual, you lie...
As usual you claim the other side lies in order to avoid the facts.

Quote:
[indent]Hellerstein laid out a number of proposed fixes for what he saw as deficiencies in the settlement and told the two sides to resume negotiations.
Go read the OP both side have no idea what to do now, this is starting all over because the judge for no valid reason rejected the settlement BOTH sides agreed to.

Why can't you admit that?

Quote:
He rejected the idea that a third or more of the money should go to the plaintiffs' lawyers and said the legal fees should be paid by the WTC Captive, not the workers.
Both parties agreed otherwise.

Quote:
Hellerstein said workers should have ample opportunities to ask questions and get answers about the settlement, and he offered to go on a mini-speaking tour to get information to the plaintiffs.
This has been going on for years and they had a final 3 months to do so.


Quote:
He said more money should be set aside for people who later develop cancer that may be linked to ground zero toxins.
They can take their money and buy cancer policies, but there is NO sign of ANY increased cancers.

Quote:
Part of the WHOLE PURPOSE of this is to make sure that we set aside adequate money to pay for their future medical expenses. And you want to pretend there is no problem.
There is no proof there is a problem and those people can buy policies to insure themselves against future cancers if they so desire.

AGAIN, BOTH PARTIES AGREED TO THE SETTLEMENT. The judge has given no valid reason to dismiss it out of hand. He is basing in on conjecture not the evidence presented

"Yet, statistics show that cancer rates among those who worked in trade center rubble are in line with rates among the general public.

The three major research efforts tracking the health of ground zero responders have so far failed to turn up evidence linking any type of cancer to the dust.
"
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old 04-01-2010, 10:39 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,619
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,310 Times in 9,281 Posts
Post Re: Judge: $575M settlement rejected for 9/11 'heroes'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger View Post
If both parties agree to it he better have a damn good reason not to.
He did.
He gave it.
And it's his job to make that decision. Not yours.

You're just whining cause you don't like the decision and you want to armchair quarterback the situation that you know next to nothing about.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
You've yet to show it.
As usual you claim the other side lies in order to avoid the facts.
I've already quoted his reasoning at least twice.
You keep ignoring it...
Hellerstein laid out a number of proposed fixes for what he saw as deficiencies in the settlement and told the two sides to resume negotiations.

He rejected the idea that a third or more of the money should go to the plaintiffs' lawyers and said the legal fees should be paid by the WTC Captive, not the workers.

Hellerstein said workers should have ample opportunities to ask questions and get answers about the settlement, and he offered to go on a mini-speaking tour to get information to the plaintiffs.

"I will make myself available in union halls, fire department houses, police precincts and schools," Hellerstein said.

He said more money should be set aside for people who later develop cancer that may be linked to ground zero toxins. He said he wanted to retain ultimate control over which workers were entitled to have claims paid.
http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/law...-heroes-2.html


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
Go read the OP both side have no idea what to do now, this is starting all over because the judge for no valid reason rejected the settlement BOTH sides agreed to.
I recommend they wake up and read what the judge said.
It clearly outlines what he wants.
If they "have no idea", then they should read his ruling.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
Both parties agreed otherwise.
So what?
If one party is caving due to strong arm tactics, the judge SHOULD stick up for the victims.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
This has been going on for years and they had a final 3 months to do so.
Name me the law that sets the dead-line...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
They can take their money and buy cancer policies, but there is NO sign of ANY increased cancers.

Some people smoke 20 years without cancer.
Year 25? Boom!

How many years did it take to figure out that smoking caused cancer, and now we accept that as irrefutable fact???

To pretend that we know everything about the cancer impact in less than 10 years is ridiculous!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
There is no proof there is a problem and those people can buy policies to insure themselves against future cancers if they so desire.
This whole "they can buy policies" junk is amazing.
People keep overlooking the fact that they incurred these problems WHILE IN SERVICE OF THE GOVERNMENT.
I realize for some Republicans, the concept of ON THE JOB INJURY and COMPENSATION are strange ideas.

But in this case, it's the reason the case is being brought in the first place.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
AGAIN...
I don't know why you repeat yourself yet refuse to address my comments.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
$575m, 9 or 11, for, heroes, judge, rejected, settlement

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0