Skip to comments.Trayvon Martin's parents settle wrongful death claim (One Million Dollars?)
Posted on 04/05/2013 10:03:45 AM PDT by Responsibility2ndEdited on 04/05/2013 10:16:00 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
SANFORD - Trayvon Martin's parents have settled a wrongful death claim for an amount believed to be more than $1 million against the homeowners association of the Sanford subdivision where their teenage son was killed.
Their attorney, Benjamin Crump, filed that paperwork at the Seminole County Courthouse, a portion of which was made public today.
(Excerpt) Read more at orlandosentinel.com ...
The Martins are happy now. They got paid...I predict the money will be gone in a year on partying, gambling, luxury automobiles, and vacation. You know sort of like Obama just 10 times less...
It would be funny if the insurance company took Crump's filing of the agreement as breach of the agreement, and sued for breach of contract.
The judge knew more about this case than she let on.
Yes indeed. Her remark that she was "in the dark" about it was never credible to me. It's something that need not be said, and where saying it implies that the opposite is true.
Here’s another question:
If O’Mara advised the HOA to settle the civil lawsuit, is that a conflict of interest regarding his representation of Zimmerman???
Assuming for the sake of argument that O'Mara is involved in making legal decision for the HOA, maybe, on a technicality, but I think no. While both cases have a nexus in the underlying event, the two defendants (HOA for civil damages and Zimmerman for a crime) have radically different basis for liability/guilt. Even if O'Mara represented Zimmerman in a civil case with the same underlying basis (death of Martin), he could advise a settlement in lieu of trial, and not be doing a disservice to his client.
From a wiki page (because it provides a reasonable simplification) ...
"A conflict of interest is a set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgment or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by a secondary interest."I see no conflict between the HOA interests and Zimmerman's interests. HOA liability stands independently from Zimmerman's criminal case, and the outcome of a civil case against the HOA has no bearing whatsoever on the outcome of the state's criminal charge against Zimmerman. Said another way, it is possible for Zimmerman to be found innocent, and the HOA to be found liable, because the duty of the HOA is different from Zimmerman's right to defend himself.
I would say the lawyer and then the drug dealer. With any luck they will overdose.
That’s a lot of Lottery Tickets. Whatever pittance they actually get after it filters through their lawyers’ kidneys will be gone in six months.
We should have a class action suit and sue them for 1 million dollars for....we'll think of something.
The domestic terrorist trayvon got what he deserved and the perp was trespassing on private property. I think this is a spin by the liberal media for PR purposes.
Why would he risk that and file this with the court???
Everyone plays the legal system, now. Bush tried and failed to establish real tort reform. Frivolus law suits should lead to severe penalties.
The other side of the corrupt coin is the way corporations can grind you up in court. Someone close to me came up with location technology on the phone and Google is breaking his patents and threatening his major customers. Because Google and government is one, my friend might lose.
The whole judicial system is trash.
To establish that he is opposing counsel, which is a point of consideration in the issue of whether or not he may be forced to testify in the criminal case. O'Mara has appealed Nelson's order precluding him (O'Mara) from deposing Crump, and Crump thought it would be beneficial to have something on the record that tends to establish he is opposing a "not guilty" outcome in the criminal case.
From a legal point of view, I think it was a stupid move on Crump's part. Any court would accept that he is opposing counsel of a sort, just based on his statement of intention to sue Zimmerman.
From a PR point of view, well, read what people are saying about the case and about O'Mara, based on the filing. If nothing else, Crump has succeeded in creating a dense smoke screen.
Representatives of The Retreat at Twin Lakes subdivision at one point in the negotiations offered the Martin family a $1 million settlement, Shawn Vincent, a spokesman for Zimmerman’s defense team, told Reuters.
The Sentinel reported on Friday that the settlement amount was crossed out of paperwork filed at the Seminole County Courthouse. Later in the day, the document appeared to have been withdrawn from public view.
Although a cover page indicated copies of the settlement were given to Zimmerman’s lawyer and the judge presiding over the criminal trial, Vincent told Reuters that the defense team did not receive its copy.
Crump giveth and Crump taketh away —
LOL. Thanks for the pointer to that article. Crump is good at murk.
I'd like to see the original source for the contention that the judge gave Crump 10 days to argue against making the document public.
That's O'Mara's fault for opening his big mouth up about HOA case and say anything about it to the media.
To me it would have been wise for Liberty Mutual/HOA to have O'Mara on retainer to advise periodically about the status of the criminal case -- but that's all.
Any advice on settlement would and should have been out of bounds, and any statements regarding the HOA case and any inside information to the media should have been out of bounds as well.
Once again his big mouth has him in trouble.
I do agree, his "big mouth" got him in trouble. He has no obligation to tell the media anything, and he should know that the media is as much his enemy as is the state of Florida.
Crump is establishing that he is opposing counsel, for purposes of avoiding being deposed in the criminal case. I think filing the settlement agreement is unnecessary for that purpose, as his proffer that he is counsel for the Martins and he intends to sue Zimmerman is likely sufficient to establish him as "opposing counsel" in that sense.
Wouldn't a proffer from O'Mara that he does not intend to represent Zimmerman in any such civil suit trump that Crump proffer???
The only logical basis for liability for the HOA, and thus its insurer, is as you suggest: that the HOA was responsible for GZ’s actions because it either sponsored, or condoned his work as Neighborhood Watch Captain, and that he was acting in that capacity when the shooting occured.
This has interesting implications. If the HOA accepts the argument that GZ was acting as its agent, why isn’t the HOA liable for the cost of GZ’s defense? It could argue that he was conducting himself negligently, or willfully improperly, but if the insurer feels the HOA was $1 Million + responsible for his conduct, that wouldn’t seem to hold water.
Good Point. GZ may be suing the HOA next for that and maintaining an unsafe neighborhood watch environment.