Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Moffett v Computer Sciences All Combined

Moffett v Computer Sciences All Combined

Ratings: (0)|Views: 14 |Likes:
Published by Thalia Sanders
all the cases that I could find on West Law from 2011. Over 182 people join in to sue.
all the cases that I could find on West Law from 2011. Over 182 people join in to sue.

More info:

Categories:Topics, Art & Design
Published by: Thalia Sanders on Nov 28, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

11/28/2011

pdf

text

original

 
Westlaw Delivery Summary Report for PATRON ACCESS,-
Your Search: TI(Thomas /5 L. /5 Moffett, /5 II & Computer /5 Sciences /5Corp)Date/Time of Request: Monday, November 28, 2011 11:08 EasternClient Identifier: PATRON ACCESSDatabase: ALLCASESLines: 5663Documents: 19Images: 0
Civil. Moffett v. CSC
The material accompanying this summary is subject to copyright. Usage is governed by contract with Thomson Reuters,West and their affiliates.
 
Only the Westlaw citation is currently available.United States District Court,D. Maryland,Southern Division.
Thomas L
.
MOFFETT
,
II
, et al., Plaintiffs,v.COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION, et al.,Defendants.Civil Action No. 805–CV–01547.Sept. 18, 2011.Donald W. Marcari,Frank D. Lawrence, III, Mar- cari Russotto and Spencer, Chesapeake, VA,MartinH. Freeman, Freeman and Freeman PC, Rockville,MD, for Plaintiffs.Arthur F. Fergenson, Ansa Assuncao LLP,Holly Drumheller Butler, DLA Piper US LLP,Jason Daniel Medinger,Allen F. Loucks, Office of the United States Attorney,Steven Michael Klepper, Kramon and Graham PC,James D. Skeen, Skeen and Kauffman LLP,Brett Anthony Buckwalter, Niles Barton and Wilmer LLP, Baltimore, MD,JayI. Morstein, Owings Mills, MD, Tyler Brian Raimo,Computer Sciences Corporation, Falls Church, VA,Darren Seth Wall, Department of Homeland Secur-ity, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Ar-lington, VA,Robert H. King,Jr., Sonnenschein Nath and Rosenthal LLP, Chicago, IL,Kirk RobertRuthenberg, SNR Denton US LLP,Steuart H. Thomsen, Sutherland Asbill and Brennan LLP,Scott Nathan Auby,W. Neil Eggleston, Debevoise and Plimpton LLP,Elizabeth Treubert Simon, Pamela Anne Bresnahan, Vorys Sater Seymour andPease LLP, Washington, DC,Gerald JosephNielsen, Nielsen Law Firm LLC, Metairie, LA,Peter F. Axelrad, Council Baradel Kosmerl and No-lan PA, Annapolis, MD,Patricia McHugh Lambert, Steven B. Schwartzman, Hodes Pessin and KatzPA, Towson, MD,Craig Russell Blackman,Samuel J. Arena, Jr., Stradley Ronon Stevens and YoungLLP, Philadelphia, PA,Edward J. Hutchins,Jr., Stacey Ann Moffet, Eccleston and Wolf PC, Han-over, M.d,William J. Hickey, Law Offices of Wil- liam J. Hickey LLC, Rockville, MD,Debra AnneNelson,William Lowell Mundy, Mundy and Nel- son, Huntington, WV,James Hilton Crosby, CrosbySaad LLC, Mobile, AL,William Gerald Gandy, Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman and Dicker,McLean, VA,Bradish J. Waring,Mary Legare Hughes, Nexsen Pruet LLC, Charleston, SC, forDefendants.
 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CON-CERNING WAIVER CLAIM OF FREDERICK STAIGERWALD
DENNIS M. SWEENEY, Special Master.
*1
This constitutes the Report and Recom-mendation to the Court concerning the waiver claimof Frederick StaigerwaldFN1pursuant to Part 1.f of the Memorandum Order of the Court (Document467). In preparing this report, the Special Masterreviewed the motions, memoranda, affidavits andexhibits provided in connection with the processspecified in the Memorandum Order. As necessary,the Special Master also reviewed other documentsthat are part of the Court filings in this case. TheSpecial Master was also provided by the FederalEmergency Management Agency (“FEMA”) thecomputer disc of the “appropriate documents of re-cord” for this claim, as specified in Part 1.a of theMemorandum Order. In this case, the documentsconsist of 488 pages labeled FEMA–000001 to000488.FN1.At various points the parties refer toClarence and Garnetta Staigerwald as alsopursuing this claim as co-owners with Fre-derick Staigerwald. The determination hereapplies to all these persons.
I. Background
Plaintiff's property located at 9203 CuckoldPoint Road, Baltimore, Maryland, was insured un-Page 1Slip Copy, 2011 WL 4381760 (D.Md.)
(Cite as: 2011 WL 4381760 (D.Md.))
© 2011 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.
 
der a Standard Flood Insurance Policy (“SFIP” or“Policy”), Policy Number 1947155378, which waspurchased directly from FEMA.
See
FEMA–000005. Plaintiff's structure was insured upto $198,700.00 and his contents were insured up to$32,100.00, with each subject to a $1,000.00 de-ductible.
Id.
On September 18, 2003, Hurricane Isabelstruck the coast of Maryland, causing damage alongthe coast including the insured structure owned byPlaintiff.
See
FEMA–000079. Plaintiff's policy waseffective July 20, 2003 through July 20, 2004 andwas covered at the time of the loss.
See
FEMA–000124.On or about January 6, 2004, Bryan Shober, anindependent adjuster from Bellmon Adjusters, Inc.,completed his adjustment of Plaintiff's claim and is-sued his report.
See
FEMA–000393 throughFEMA–000411. The adjuster concluded Plaintiff'scontents loss exceeded policy limits and that theActual Cash Value of the damage to the structurewas $82,875.75 after application of $15,428.88 indepreciation and Plaintiff's $1,000.00 deductible.
See
FEMA–000393. The adjuster also concludedthat the full replacement cost of the structure was$139,773.12 with an actual cash value of $111,818.50.
Id.
On January 14, 2004, Plaintiff submitted aProof of Loss for $114,975.75 with the words“CONTESTING AMOUNT” written on the bottom,which was rejected.
See
FEMA–000413. Plaintiff also notated “Plus excess over contents policy Lim-its” next to Line 8.
Id.
On February 11, 2004, FEMA issued a partialdenial of Plaintiff's claim.
See
FEMA–000345.Plaintiff was informed that checks would be issuedfor $82,875.75 to cover the damage to his buildingand for the remainder of his contents policy limit of $32,100.00.
Id.
Plaintiff was notified that he hadone year from the date of this partial denial letter tofile a lawsuit.
Id.
On March 19, 2004, Plaintiff was sent a letternotifying him that the adjuster requested a specialassistance review to facilitate the completion of hisclaim.
See
FEMA–000331. Plaintiff was remindedthat his claim was partially denied on February 11,2004 and that he had to file a lawsuit within oneyear of that date.
Id.
*2
On April 14, 2004, FEMA notified Plaintiff that it was in receipt of the re-inspection report.
See
FEMA–000315. The re-inspection resulted in a re-commendation for additional compensation, and thereport was being sent back to Bellmon Adjusters,Inc. for completion of the supplemental claim.
Id.
Plaintiff was once again reminded that if he was go-ing to file a lawsuit, he had one year from the dateof the original denial of February 11, 2004.
Id.
On April 20, 2004, Michael Bellmon, an inde-pendent adjuster from Bellmon Adjusters com-pleted a supplemental adjustment of Plaintiff'sclaim based on the re-inspection report.
See
FEMA–000115 through FEMA–000119. Mr. Bell-mon increased the actual cash value of the buildingloss claim by $11,659.48.At about the same time, Plaintiff requested re-view by the Hurricane Isabel Task Force. On June3, 2004, the Task Force determined Plaintiff wasentitled to additional compensation totaling$50,865.16.
See
FEMA–000111. On June 18, 2004,Plaintiff was paid the full $50,865.16.
See
FEMA–000022.On July 20, 2004, a FEMA examiner reviewedthe estimates Plaintiff provided from Palmer Con-tracting Company and C.W. Over & Sons, Inc.
See
FEMA–000186 and FEMA–000187. The examinerconcluded the home was poorly constructed.
Id.
FEMA contends that The Palmer Contracting es-timate did not provide a sufficient breakdown to doa detailed comparison.
Id.
C.W. Over & Sons' es-timate contained pricing that was significantly in-flated, and after adjusting the costs, the C.W. Over& Sons estimate was reduced to $121,133.17 (
see
FEMA–000227 through FEMA–000229), whichPage 2Slip Copy, 2011 WL 4381760 (D.Md.)
(Cite as: 2011 WL 4381760 (D.Md.))
© 2011 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->