snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > SLC Central > Hurricane Katrina

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09 January 2008, 06:30 PM
Spam & Cookies-mmm's Avatar
Spam & Cookies-mmm Spam & Cookies-mmm is offline
 
Join Date: 09 July 2002
Location: Northwest Florida
Posts: 12,864
Yow! Katrina victim sues for $3 quadrillion

Federal government hit with 489,000 damage claims after hurricane


Quote:
NEW ORLEANS - Hurricane Katrina's victims have put a price tag on their suffering and it is staggering including one plaintiff seeking the unlikely sum of $3 quadrillion.

The total number $3,014,170,389,176,410 is the dollar figure so far sought from some 489,000 claims filed against the federal government over damage from the failure of levees and flood walls following the Aug. 29, 2005, hurricane..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09 January 2008, 08:06 PM
LilacFields's Avatar
LilacFields LilacFields is offline
 
 
Join Date: 28 December 2006
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 5,398
Default

That particular victim is an idiot and has an idiot for an attorney as well.

At least ask for damages that are realistic.

LF
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09 January 2008, 08:08 PM
DemonWolf's Avatar
DemonWolf DemonWolf is offline
 
Join Date: 24 April 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 13,114
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LilacFields View Post
That particular victim is an idiot and has an idiot for an attorney as well.

At least ask for damages that are realistic.

LF
Like $3 kajillion?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09 January 2008, 08:20 PM
bthyb's Avatar
bthyb bthyb is offline
 
Join Date: 31 January 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 8,886
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DemonWolf View Post
Like $3 kajillion?
Try $3 Brazilian
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09 January 2008, 08:40 PM
Illuminatus Illuminatus is offline
 
Join Date: 26 February 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,695
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LilacFields View Post
That particular victim is an idiot and has an idiot for an attorney as well.

At least ask for damages that are realistic.

LF
You are allowed to ask for anything you want, but by court rule you must cackle like Dr. Evil when announcing the figure.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09 January 2008, 08:57 PM
LilacFields's Avatar
LilacFields LilacFields is offline
 
 
Join Date: 28 December 2006
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 5,398
Default

Can the judge also cackle like Dr. Evil when tossing the case out?

The case may have merit but because of the amount being asked, I'd be inclined to reward the stupidity of the asker by tossing the whole thing. Let him waste someone else's time. Well, I'd do that if I were a judge, anyway.

LF
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10 January 2008, 12:11 AM
Errata's Avatar
Errata Errata is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 13,201
Default

Maybe its a bargaining tactic. While suing for $3 quadrillion they'll offer to settle for $3 trillion.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10 January 2008, 12:42 AM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,789
Default

Speaking of idiotic lawyers, from the OP:
Quote:
Daniel Becnel, Jr., a lawyer who said his clients have filed more than 60,000 claims, said measuring Katrina's devastation in dollars and cents is a nearly impossible task.

"There's no way on earth you can figure it out," he said. "The trauma these people have undergone is unlike anything that has occurred in the history of our country."
Talk about someone in need of a history book or five.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10 January 2008, 01:34 PM
diddy diddy is offline
 
Join Date: 07 March 2004
Location: Plymouth, MN
Posts: 10,928
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Errata View Post
Maybe its a bargaining tactic. While suing for $3 quadrillion they'll offer to settle for $3 trillion.
If it were a bargaining tactic, I would still say that it is a terrible one to attempt. A lawyer would have to be out if his mind to even think that a suit asking for that would be taken seriously. Heck the aftermath would devistate more people than it would help.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10 January 2008, 05:54 PM
Griffin2020
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganzfeld View Post
Speaking of idiotic lawyers, from the OP: Talk about someone in need of a history book or five.
Because, you know, Katrina was the first major hurricane to hit the Gulf Coast, and caused the first relatively localized flooding.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10 January 2008, 06:00 PM
Ryda Wong, EBfCo. Ryda Wong, EBfCo. is offline
 
Join Date: 14 December 2005
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 24,027
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganzfeld View Post
Speaking of idiotic lawyers, from the OP: Talk about someone in need of a history book or five.
Actually, I do think that the Katrina situation was rather unique in the scale and scope of the devistation that occurred.

I, personally, can't think of another event that happened in the U.S. that was quite that, well, messy on so many levels (all of the dead bodies in the aftermath, the long period of lack of food and water, the mass evacuations and relocations that lead to some really troubling and fascinating local politics, etc.)
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10 January 2008, 07:33 PM
RBCal RBCal is offline
 
 
Join Date: 04 April 2005
Location: Palm Springs, CA
Posts: 1,743
Default

I'd be the last person to defend the federal government's response to Katrina but I personally think that none of the suits have merit.

If you live in a hurricane zone eventually you will have a hurricane hit. I live in an earthquake zone and wouldn't imagine suing the government for damage to my house after an earthquake.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10 January 2008, 07:48 PM
LilacFields's Avatar
LilacFields LilacFields is offline
 
 
Join Date: 28 December 2006
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 5,398
Default

They aren't suing over the hurricane itself but over the damages caused by the levy breakage and failure of floodwalls.

It sounds nitpicky but if I recall correctly, some people's insurance refused to cover claims for damage caused by the levy breaking. I guess if they can show that the government was negligent in building/maintaining the levies and flood walls, then they would have a legitimate claim.

Of course, demanding $3 quadrillion is absolutely absurd...

LF
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10 January 2008, 07:52 PM
Spam & Cookies-mmm's Avatar
Spam & Cookies-mmm Spam & Cookies-mmm is offline
 
Join Date: 09 July 2002
Location: Northwest Florida
Posts: 12,864
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LilacFields View Post
Of course, demanding $3 quadrillion is absolutely absurd...

LF
Maybe he owned a lot of rental properties.

I wonder if that 3Quad will turn out to be a typo. The zero-key just got stuck down.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10 January 2008, 07:54 PM
LilacFields's Avatar
LilacFields LilacFields is offline
 
 
Join Date: 28 December 2006
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 5,398
Default

Never mind

LF

Last edited by LilacFields; 10 January 2008 at 07:55 PM. Reason: Because I apparently can't read.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10 January 2008, 07:55 PM
Mama Duck's Avatar
Mama Duck Mama Duck is offline
 
Join Date: 22 October 2001
Location: South Texas
Posts: 12,151
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RBCal View Post
If you live in a hurricane zone eventually you will have a hurricane hit. I live in an earthquake zone and wouldn't imagine suing the government for damage to my house after an earthquake.
But you would expect that earthquake codes were enforced right? Would you sue if after an earthquake, you find out that the government had stopped enforcing such a code, particularly if it can be proven that code enforcement would have limited the damage?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10 January 2008, 08:06 PM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,789
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryda Wong, EBfCo. View Post
Actually, I do think that the Katrina situation was rather unique in the scale and scope of the devistation that occurred.

I, personally, can't think of another event that happened in the U.S. that was quite that, well, messy on so many levels (all of the dead bodies in the aftermath, the long period of lack of food and water, the mass evacuations and relocations that lead to some really troubling and fascinating local politics, etc.)
I would have thought you listened to the blues more than that, Ryda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_M..._Flood_of_1927

Not that these are the only "messy" events on a large scale that left lots of dead bodies to clean up. I mean, there was this little matter of the Civil War, for one, among other events. Katrina was terrible but not particularly unique except that maybe it was the first time Geraldo and Sean Penn went to the scene.

Here's another hurricane, much worse:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galveston_Hurricane
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10 January 2008, 08:19 PM
Mama Duck's Avatar
Mama Duck Mama Duck is offline
 
Join Date: 22 October 2001
Location: South Texas
Posts: 12,151
Default

In 1995, New Orleans flooded from rain water, prompting pumping system updates. Before that, there was Hurricane Camille that wiped out South West Louisiana in 1969 and practically stranded New Orleans for a few days. Before that, Hurrican Betsy killed dozens of people in New Orleans and caused over a billion dollars in damaged, but the levies held. Before that, New Orleans was subject to yellow fever epidemics and fires that razed the city at least twice. About every 25-50 years, New Orleans gets the sh*t kicked out of it through something.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10 January 2008, 08:22 PM
Aimee Evilpixie's Avatar
Aimee Evilpixie Aimee Evilpixie is offline
 
Join Date: 20 January 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 12,810
Hello Kitty

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganzfeld View Post
I would have thought you listened to the blues more than that, Ryda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_M..._Flood_of_1927

Not that these are the only "messy" events on a large scale that left lots of dead bodies to clean up. I mean, there was this little matter of the Civil War, for one, among other events. Katrina was terrible but not particularly unique except that maybe it was the first time Geraldo and Sean Penn went to the scene.

Here's another hurricane, much worse:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galveston_Hurricane
The thing is, Katrina should not have been such a disaster. We had the technology to see that the storm was coming and that it was going to be bad. There were warnings about the levees being insufficient. Hell, we had helicopters and stuff that could have been used immediately after the hurricane subsided to start getting people out or supplies in.

That didn't happen, though. This was entirely preventable with our current technology, but no one really cared until too late, in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10 January 2008, 08:23 PM
RBCal RBCal is offline
 
 
Join Date: 04 April 2005
Location: Palm Springs, CA
Posts: 1,743
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mama Duck View Post
But you would expect that earthquake codes were enforced right? Would you sue if after an earthquake, you find out that the government had stopped enforcing such a code, particularly if it can be proven that code enforcement would have limited the damage?
I'd sue the builder since he skimped on construction. I guess the government is the builder of the levee so perhaps the suits might have some merit.

However, if I were to live in New Orleans I wouldn't have purchased in a neighborhood subject to flooding. The French Quarter didn't flood since its on higher ground. It was built before there were levees.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.