SECC
[Top] [All Lists]

[SECC] Ham wins law suit against insurance company

Subject: [SECC] Ham wins law suit against insurance company
From: nq4i at contesting.com (Rick Dougherty NQ4I)
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 07:28:23 -0400
Message

  Bob wins!  Bob wins!  Read all about it...

  -----Original Message-----
  From: Jim Altman [mailto:jaltman at altlaw.com]
  Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 12:25 PM
  To: ham-law at altlaw.com
  Subject: [ham-law] Rarely do I get to toot my own horn


  Usually I only make occasional administrative postings about the use of the 
list, BUT NOW...

  I represented a client whose crank-up tower was damaged in a thunderstorm and 
whose insurance company refused to pay on the grounds that:

  a) the tower was not a permanent structure; or,
  b) his maintenance was negligent

  The insurance co. and I agreed to waive a jury and try it to the court.  
Trial took two days, their expert testified my client should have replaced the 
cable long ago, but that the type of cable should last 20-30 years.  It was 19 
years old.  Nor could their structural engineer expert identify which cable was 
the up cable or the down cable.

  They contended the tower was not "permanent" notwithstanding the 21 tons of 
concrete anchoring it.  I pulled out a picture of the London Bridge (now 
located in Lake Havasu, Arizona) and asked if that was permanent.

  Judgment received in the mail today, we are THE WINNERS!  $25,000.00 damages. 
 Yee-hah!

  Winning is always more fun than losing.

  We now return you to ordinary programming.



  Jim Altman
  jaltman at altlaw.com

_______________________________________________________
The Ham-Law Mailing List. This list is for discussion and does not 
purport to give legal advice. 

Submissions:  ham-law at altlaw.com
Subscribe and unsubscribe:    listserver at altlaw.com
Use "(un)subscribe ham-law at altlaw.com" on a new line in the text.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>