Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Climate change lawsuits filed against some 200 US communities
Christian Science Monitor ^ | May 17, 2014 | By Mica Rosenberg

Posted on 05/17/2014 8:42:41 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer

A major insurance company is accusing dozens of localities in Illinois of failing to prepare for severe rains and flooding in lawsuits that are the first in what could be a wave of litigation over who should be liable for the possible costs of climate change.

Farmers Insurance filed nine class actions last month against nearly 200 communities in the Chicago area. It is arguing that local governments should have known rising global temperatures would lead to heavier rains and did not do enough to fortify their sewers and stormwater drains.

The legal debate may center on whether an uptick in natural disasters is foreseeable or an "act of God."

(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Illinois
KEYWORDS: actofgod; ccliability; chicago; climatechangefraud; climatechangelawsuit; climategate; communitiessued; farmersinsurance; hoax; insurance; liablity
Interesting force majeure issue. Are insurable weather risks an act of God or "man made".
1 posted on 05/17/2014 8:42:41 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Farmers Insurance. Run by Torte lawyers. Disgusting.

Reminder. Never insure with Farmers.


2 posted on 05/17/2014 8:45:36 AM PDT by DariusBane (Liberty and Risk. Flip sides of the same coin. So how much risk will YOU accept? Vive Deco et Vives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

It will force the governments to embrace the skeptics and say there is no man caused climate change, or that the change is not significant.

After some hesitation, I say good on you, Farmers.


3 posted on 05/17/2014 8:45:45 AM PDT by henkster (Do I really need a sarcasm tag?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

So farmers Insurance has proof that the climate is warming? If so, they should have increased their rates.


4 posted on 05/17/2014 8:48:04 AM PDT by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

SCOTUS is responsible for this, in some measure. Their ruling gave the enviroNazis legal standing.


5 posted on 05/17/2014 8:48:22 AM PDT by cld51860 (Oderint dum metuant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

“Farmers Insurance filed nine class actions last month against nearly 200 communities in the Chicago area”

We have a local scumbag lawyer that files near frivolous claims under the disabilities act. It is a total shakedown operation. This sounds like something he would do. Way to go Farmers. If anyone doubted you were scumbags before this should remove any doubt.


6 posted on 05/17/2014 8:50:02 AM PDT by Lurkina.n.Learnin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Tort reform - now more than ever.


7 posted on 05/17/2014 8:50:17 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

This is absolutely ridiculous!! How can anyone “know” what the weather will be? Even the weather people get it wrong more than right. As to “know” based on climate change, I hope the judge throws this out since the basic premise “man made climate change” is a hoax. If this goes through, how many other insurance companies will refuse to pay saying the insurer “should have known” and taken appropriate precautions?


8 posted on 05/17/2014 8:50:44 AM PDT by Humal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cld51860

You are probably referencing their ruling that the epa may regulate CO2. Too bad there aren’t any scientist on the panel. Coming soon, regulating the amount of solar radiation you may legally absorb in a given time period. Want some extra rays? You can buy some.


9 posted on 05/17/2014 8:51:32 AM PDT by rktman (Ethnicity: Nascarian. Race: Daytonafivehundrian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
An insurance company looking to get someone else to pay the cost of their major claims. I never thought I'd see the day.

/sarcasm off/

10 posted on 05/17/2014 8:52:46 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("What in the wide, wide world of sports is goin' on here?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2
bingo...
11 posted on 05/17/2014 8:53:50 AM PDT by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -vvv- NO Pity for the LAZY - 86-44)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Here we go, legislating science - that is what put Galileo behind bars for the later years of his life. Imagine...insisting that the earth is not flat!


12 posted on 05/17/2014 8:55:45 AM PDT by broken_arrow1 (I regret that I have but one life to give for my country - Nathan Hale "Patriot")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Humal

I’m not a lawyer, but I think this is a smart move by the insurance company. Could be wrong. But, Farmers is looking at weather damage which normally would be considered an Act of God. “Climate change” redefines these as Acts of Man. That could change insurable risks the company has to pay and they are simply trying to find out their legal liability.

Again, I ain’t a lawyer.


13 posted on 05/17/2014 8:57:17 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Will Farmer’s now remove “Act of God” as an excuse from paying off on a claim?


14 posted on 05/17/2014 9:00:51 AM PDT by raybbr (Obamacare needs a death panel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2
farmers Insurance has proof that the climate is warming?

Yes, Obama's gubmint told them so.

I say go for it.

15 posted on 05/17/2014 9:04:37 AM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate "Republicans Freed the Slaves" Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rktman

That’s the one!


16 posted on 05/17/2014 9:05:25 AM PDT by cld51860 (Oderint dum metuant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

When reading the article I had to make sure this was not satire.


17 posted on 05/17/2014 9:08:51 AM PDT by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer


So mankind is more powerful than the Sun???
18 posted on 05/17/2014 9:11:54 AM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; We need a second party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Good point.
I reminds me of a joke I heard on the radio. A church group had gathered outside a bar to pray for its removal. Soon after the bar burned down. The owner of the bar sued the church. The church denied their prayers had anything to do with it. The judge says, “I don’t know who to believe, the bar owner who believes in God, or the church that doesn’t.”
That’s probably not word-for-word, but it is the best I can remember.


19 posted on 05/17/2014 9:13:10 AM PDT by Excellence (Marine mom since April 11, 2014)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
That is a new twist in the climate disruption issue.

Maybe, they would also sue The Weather Channel.
20 posted on 05/17/2014 9:14:07 AM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
Will Farmer’s now remove “Act of God” as an excuse from paying off on a claim?

Not as I read this. What Farmers is saying is if one believes in man-made climate change then future risks from weather events are "foreseeable", and therefore unless the cities upgrade their sewers, etc. Farmers may not pay claims. It's a vicious cycle based on a hoax.

21 posted on 05/17/2014 9:18:54 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

So basically rather than doing what an insurance company normally does and withdraws from insuring the uninsurable, Farmers is going to sue them to make themselves insurable to a new standard.

I’m guessing Farmers has already noted which contractors will do the work and insures them now or hopes to insure them in the future.


22 posted on 05/17/2014 9:25:15 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

How did Farmers determine that the “climate change” they claim is the ignored peril would result in *more* rather than *fewer* weather-related hazards? “Change” is equivocal; it can mean...anything. For sure, I am relying on the second-hand use of the word “change” in the article and do not know whether that word was used in the suit(s). I’d be surprised if this goes anywhere but IANAL nor a judge nor a paid-off member of any class.


23 posted on 05/17/2014 10:24:51 AM PDT by Attention Surplus Disorder (At no time was the Obama administration aware of what the Obama administration was doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

This deserves a big ping. It might be the most important story this year. It opens up a whole new front in the battle against the AGW religionists.


24 posted on 05/17/2014 10:32:56 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Next month I will be soliciting quotes for my homeowners, auto and umbrella policies. In view of State Farm’s actions, I will not even consider them.


25 posted on 05/17/2014 11:30:04 AM PDT by CdMGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CdMGuy

This is Farmers not State Farm.


26 posted on 05/17/2014 2:08:51 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Humal

Wait the judge cannot throw this out, its govt policy that you believe as they do.


27 posted on 05/17/2014 2:23:12 PM PDT by ully2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cld51860
I'd suggest that there were indications of that with the Kelo decision, too.

With Kelo, SCOTUS essentially rolled the dice and bet that since the New London redevelopment plan would guarantee increased tax revenues for the city, they could justify redefinging the 5th amendment "public use" into what was not written in the Constitution, "public good."

They rolled snake eyes.

Now SCOTUS has bet on the weather, too?

-PJ

28 posted on 05/17/2014 3:09:03 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ully2

:-)


29 posted on 05/18/2014 3:02:46 AM PDT by Humal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson