Superstorm Sandy

Florida's rule providing protection for the honest errors of attorneys in their judgment about a debatable point of law has shielded a law firm facing a malpractice suit for its choice not to use a particular expert witness in support of hurricane damage claim, Harris Martin reports. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit found that Florida's judgmental immunity doctrine applied to the law firm's decision.

Law 360's Jeff Sistrunk reports that a condo association sued Childress Duffy for how that firm handled a breach of contract suit against Citizens Property Insurance Co. The condo association was seeking recovery for property damage from Hurricane Frances, including a $1.5 million claim for an elevator.

The defense wind expert called by the law firm was neither a mechanical engineer nor an elevator expert. A jury trial ended in a directed verdict.

Homeowners who think they were shortchanged in the money they received for damage from Superstorm Sandy are going to get another chance to seek reimbursement through the National Flood Insurance Program, the New York Law Journal's Andrew Keshner and the Associated Press report. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has agreed to reexamine about 142,000 claims from policyholders "amid concerns that altered damage reports have caused underpayments and denials."

It is unclear who will pay the fees for the attorneys who have been negotiating settlements of Superstorm Sandy insurance cases, The New York Law Journal's Andrew Keshner reports. The Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency say that they are not statutorily authorized to pay legal fees to plaintiffs' lawyers. But insurance carriers don't want to pay the fees out of concern that they could face qui tam whistleblower suits. Eastern District Magistrate Judges Cheryl Pollak, Ramon Reyes, Jr. and Gary Brown, the trio tasked with facilitating case resolution, held a hearing this week to resolve the fee and other issues, Keshner reports. The judges said they would restart mediation if the fee and other issues can't be resolved.

Tenative insurance settlements have been reached in 160 cases stemming from Superstorm Sandy in which engineers' damages estimates were changed, the New York Law Journal's Andrew Keshner reports. The settlements are between the Federal Emergency Management Authority and lawyers for plaintiffs and involve FEMA's "write your own" program that lets insurance companies write and service federal flood insurance.

Three federal magistrate judges called off a hearing to explore whether damage reports were altered to justify denials of insurance claims related to Superstorm Sandy, the New York Law Journal's Andrew Keshner reports. The judges, who are presiding over the storm-related insurance litigation, did so after the Federal Emergency Management Agency said it was going to create a process for disputes about the integrity of engineering practices in claims coming through FEMA's "write your own" program, which allows insurers to write federal flood insurance policies. There are 1,323 cases challenging denials or alleged underpayments by wind and flood insurers, Keshner reports.

Many plaintiffs suing their insurers over Superstorm Sandy are alleging that engineering reports were "as part of an effort to minimize insurance payments to flood victims in New York and New Jersey after the 2012 hurricane," The New York Times' David W. Chen reports. A hearing will be held Thursday, February 19, on the engineering reports.

New York City has reached a settlement to provide better "evacuation and sheltering" for people with disabilities during disasters, according to the New York Law Journal. The lawsuit was filed after Hurricane Irene and then was punctuated by Superstorm Sandy. Judge Jesse Furman found the city liable for violating the American with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act and the New York City Human Rights law. The parties settled instead of going to trial over remedies.

New York City has reached a settlement to provide better "evacuation and sheltering" for people with disabilities during disasters, according to the New York Law Journal. The lawsuit was filed after Hurricane Irene and then was punctuated by Superstorm Sandy. Judge Jesse Furman found the city liable for violating the American with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act and the New York City Human Rights law. The parties settled instead of going to trial over remedies.

Read more: http://www.newyorklawjournal.com/id=1202672056170/City-Settles-Litigatio...

According to a report in the New York Law Journal, the Federal Emergency Management Agency is seeking the return of $5.8 million of the $1.4 billion expended in emergency disaster aid for victims of Superstorm Sandy. FEMA also is reviewing another $53 million in aid payments. FEMA is seeking to recoup money in "instances where the agency believes a household got more money than allowed under program rules, but not necessarily because of an intentional attempt to cheat the system."

ProPublica reports that the Red Cross had dropped its argument that documents about how it spent $300 million in disaster-relief funds on Superstorm Sandy contain trade secrets. The Red Cross disclosed that the largest Sandy expenditures involved financial assistance, food, other relief items, programming resources and paying for the deployment of staff and volunteers: "More than half the money spent, $129.6 million, went to financial assistance, food, and other relief items. .... The next-largest expenditures were $46.1 million for 'deployment of staff and volunteers (e.g. air travel, rental vehicles, meals, lodging for volunteers)' and $30 million for 'costs of permanent program resources included in Superstorm Sandy response.'" 

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman sought details on how the Red Cross spent money on Superstorm Sandy relief, and ProPublica sought the correspondence through a Freedom of Information request, ProPublica previously reported. The Red Cross initially objected to the FOIA request on trade secret grounds.