| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Federal Judge Orders More Talks on 9/11 Deal |
| 2010-03-20 |
| The federal judge overseeing litigation between the city and workers at ground zero on Friday rejected a settlement, telling lawyers that it did not provide enough compensation to plaintiffs and needed to be renegotiated under his supervision. The decision by the judge, Alvin K. Hellerstein of United States District Court in Manhattan, came in a hearing barely a week after the settlement was announced following more than six years of legal maneuvering. The settlement provided for payouts totaling $575 million to $657.5 million in cases filed by some 10,000 rescue and cleanup workers who say they suffered health damages from toiling at ground zero after the 2001 terrorist attack. "This is no ego trip for me," Judge Hellerstein told a packed but hushed courtroom moments after hearing emotional testimony from some of the plaintiffs. "This is work. I will preside over a process that's fair." The judge had previously given signs that he intended to closely oversee how the settlement was carried out to ensure that individual workers were treated fairly. On Monday he issued an order stripping lawyers on the two sides of sole authority to choose an administrator and a medical panel to evaluate the plaintiffs' claims and said court approval would be needed. |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #5 Then the judge has the power to hold the lawyers in contempt and punish them so if he finds they have absolved themselves of their 'duty' to their clients. Will we see that? |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2010-03-20 10:55 |
| #4 Agree. This is the kind of class action litigation where the lawyers make out much better than the aggrieved. Bankruptcy is much the same. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2010-03-20 10:52 |
| #3 Judges do have the right and I agree with what this judge is doing. Both parties were playing the inside game; they agree to a dividing of the boodle so that the lawyers do better than anyone else. The judge has every right to put the lawyers in their place, and frankly, I wish more judges would do that. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2010-03-20 10:43 |
| #2 "This is work. I will preside over a process that's fair." It is a civil not criminal case. If the legal representation of both parties have agreed what is 'fair', the judge should have no standing. Unless there is criminal malfeasance and conspiracy between the lawyers, the matter is settled. Instead we have 'social justice' at work. Yes, dear King, pray tell what is 'fair'. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2010-03-20 09:02 |
| #1 ION DAILY TIMES.PK > INTELLIGENCE WARNS OF ATTACKS ON US CITIZENS [+ Retired Members of the various Secret Services]. and TOPIX/WORLD NEWS > MUELLER: AL QAEDA REMAINS COMMITTED TO ATTACKS ON THE US, ACQUIRING WMDS, + NTI: GLOBAL SECURITY NEWSWIRE - AL QAEDA STILL PURSUING WMDS [for Terror, anti-US future Strikes], FBI CHIEF SAYS. * Also from NTI:GLOBAL SECURITY NEWSWIRE > MILITANT CLAIMS TALIBAN WORKING ON [developing] ANTHRAX BOMB IN AFGHANISTAN. * TOPIX > IRAN AS AN AL QAEDA BASE. Despite any outsanding Shia-vs-Sunni + Diplom rhetoric, issues to the contrary, AL QAEDA + IRAN have a YEARS-OLD Agreement for Iran to be used as a MAJOR AL-QAEDA POINT OF FACILITATION [Logistics]. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2010-03-20 01:08 |