W000059
Tuesday, November 06, 2001 10:07 AM
Question of Whether or not awards from the September 11th
Victims compensation fund should be reduced by amount of char...
Dear Sir/Madam (whomever is reading this for AG Ashcroft) :
The answer to the question of whether awards from the Victims Fund
should be reduced by charitable donations is clearly NO.
First of all the legislation that created the fund was after all a
bailout of the airlines that, inter alia, capped airline liability for the
four hijackings at their insurance policy limits. By compensating the
victims of the WTC, the Pentagon and the PA crash the fund not only insures
prompt payment to the families affected but also, and primarily, saves the
corporate assets of the airline industries. Now without even discussing the
economic effects of not saving the airlines, the fact remains by reducing
awards by the amount of charity a victim's family received the USDOJ would
effectively be using the donations of millions of Americans, and others, to
underwrite its bail-out of the Airlines. Certainly this is not what the
Charities or the people who donated to them intended.
Secondly, by reducing the award amounts by the amounts of other
collateral sources such as life insurance, Worker's compensation and pension
survivor benefits, the fund is in step with collateral source rules in the
various jurisdictions that would be applicable in any litigation stemming
from events of September 11th. However, I cannot recall ever reading about,
nor do I believe I could find if I looked, any case were an award for
personal injury and/or wrongful death was ever reduced by any charitable
donations the plaintiff/victim had received. A fair reading if the statute,
and I have read it, would be that the fund was intended to take the place of
litigation. Variation from litigation norms were expressly provided, such
as waiving the claimants burden of proving liability, however, the claimant
must still prove their measure of damages. The language regarding
reductions of awards for monies received by collateral sources would appear
to be just the application of a collateral source rule. Since, as I stated
above, I believe that, no jurisdiction that applies a collateral source rule
to PI and wrongful death litigation, reduced the amount of damages by any
charitable amounts received, an argument could be made that reduction of the
award by such amount is not authorized by the statute. Although a
legitimate argument it is admittedly not the strongest of legal arguments,
but in the court of public opinion (combined with the above) it is some what
more compelling of an argument.
Lastly, and this is the more rhetorical and political of arguments,
if the Government is going to reduce the awards by the amount of charity a
victim receives, will they also be looking to reduce the awards by 1/3 since
the victims who opt into the fund will be eligible for free legal service
from ATLA, NYSLTA and ATLA-NJ through Trial Lawyers Care. Will the
reduction for charitable awards include donation of services from others
looking to help. It sounds ridicules to me as well, but think of the
potential sound bytes.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Individual Comment