Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "DHECC - Samples? Possibly....Random? Not likely.":
Fab-Worx Fabricators is in Pt Allen and is in the construction industry. That raises 2 red flags: causation and matching. Recent BP filings would seem to question how a Fab company in BR could have been affected by the spill, and were revenues and expenses matched.
Construction industry claims have been enjoined off and on for over a year so we know that the expediting really benefited the claimant even if there were no matching issues. But what if there were? Did BP appeal that issue? Or did they consent to the expediting AND the non-matching. It would seem to be important for the public to know that BP consented to expediting a large construction claim for the relative of a PSC member just for the fairness hearing and then moved to enjoin the same type of claims for the rest of the class one month later.
What if BP did not know. In that case, you have the Judge, CA, PSC triad improperly expediting a claim that would have had substantially less value one month later. If that really happened all 3 should resign. Immediately.
And what is the Special Master's position here. Is he going to file a claw back claim against this connected claimant that got a claim paid only because it was improperly expedited or is he going to stick to going after the shrimpers whose only crime was relying on their accountants to file their tax returns? Nevermind, we all know the answer to that question.
The above assumes that Fab-Worx was the claimant and that the claim would have been affected by the recent matching rules. The only way we will know for sure is if the judge grants Lerner's discovery request. Sadly, I think we all know that answer too.