Friday, May 24, 2013

Item # 2

A "random" commenter in the last post immediately suggested that OPSO being included in the Wisner complaint was simply a "cut and paste" clerical error.

Ok...let's say it was...I'll play along.

However, if that is also what happened with the item I'm about to mention, it's a clerical error that would result in the loss of potentially 100's of millions of dollars for Wisner.

These are claims for relief from Sheriff Gusman's complaint:

These are the claims for relief from the City's complaint:

Notice the first item listed on both, item A, is "Loss of Natural Resources". is the Wisner complaint:

Not there. The loss of natural resources claim is omitted. That is, literally, a minimum of a 100 million dollar omission in respect to the Wisner property. The loss of natural resources to Wisner in the BP spill dwarfs any loss of natural resources the City of New Orleans and especially the Sheriff could dream of.  Is that a clerical error?  If it is....some lawyer's ass should be on the street in short order.

If it's not....well.....that's another matter altogether now isn't it?


Anonymous said...

No dog in this fight. I just find this fun. I don't know anything about these people or much about BP litigation.

That said, This is an interesting inconsistency. But "natural resources" strikes me as vague. One query: does the wisner trust own the mineral rights to the land? Maybe they don't and that's why "natural resources" (whatever that means) isn't included.

Jason Brad Berry said...

They do own all the mineral rights. And mineral rights are not taxed.

It was in a previous filing by the former law firm, W & W. It was either a clerical error, which I find hard to believe, or it was purposely taken out.

Anonymous said...

Several lawyers told me to take a look at this website since this is now the talk of the legal community and ill I can say is someone needs to provide an answer here. HHCK must have recieved an indemnity letter from the City of New Orleans otherwise this could topple the entire law firm.

Jason Brad Berry said...

Anon...if they did receive an indemnity letter wouldn't that be public record?

Kevin said...

Anonymous 5/25/13

Do you believe only the HHCK firm would be responsible?

Did someone earlier say the suit in the CDC won't have a hearing until September? I would bet these claims are resolved before then.