5 ms·

Can someone tl;dr?

klyrs 7y ago
I haven't read/grokked the whole thing, but here's a very brief. Class action suit against BP got complicated because the folks who were tasked with finding clients only gathered names of local shrimpers -- not enough to even find those folks again, much less prove damages.
- duskwuff 7y ago
  And, in many cases, it appears that those folks also gathered names which were either made up or didn't belong to people who were affected. (Some examples in the article included "victims" who were dead, working abroad, and family pets.) A major question in the resulting lawsuit was whether the liability for these errors fell upon the people collecting names, or on the law firm for ignoring the problem after they recognized it.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
fuzzybear3965 7y ago
Expect some loss with this compression... In the wake of the Deepwater Horizon spill, a high-powered class-action attorney hires a team of field agents to recruit disenfranchised gulf fisherman as litigants. The field agents established a network of local recruiters to outsource clientele acquisition. Said agents bumble the solicitation of clients/fisherman, accepting fraudulent documentation from per-head subcontractors ($10 to $50 per litigant found). So, high-powered attorney receives documentation for tens of thousands of fisherman clientele to support his class action.... But, they don't exist. Realizing this, he pursues the case anyway since abandonment disadvantages the small fraction of clientele that are legitimate (in that they are unable to litigate against B.P. in the future). High-powered attorney wins the class action, ensuring to stipulate that no recourse can be had in the event that the clientele are found to be non-existent (the known case). The U.S. government drags high-powered attorney and recruiting staff into criminal court. He defends himself and establishes a defense claiming himself to be a victim of his field agents. Field agents are sentenced to many years in prison and high-powered attorney is found not guilty by a jury of his peers. You may need a TL;DR for this TL;DR.
- Judgmentality 7y ago
  Wow. This actually inspired me to read the story, because that's crazy.
- lonelappde 7y ago
  Wow, this is why lawyers have a terrible reputation. Profiting handsomely while coconspirators rot in jail.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - xmprt 7y ago
    Maybe the article is painting him in this light but what other choice did he have? If he dropped the suit then all the legitimate people wouldn't have any recourse. The people who messed up were the field agents.
    - phonon 7y ago
      He could have properly investigated the identity of the claimants at any time. More like he didn't want to know.
    - boublepop 7y ago
      The choice of not breaking the law in collecting names in the first place, of not knowingly going ahead with a case he knew was bogus. His work was a scam from the start, he had the choice to stop or come clean at every point of the way. He’s supposed to ensure the people represented exist. That responsibility shouldn’t go away because he paid some poor runners 10$ to write down the names. Imagine a rule of law where that was a legitimate escape from consequences. I could sue your boss in your name for some made up bogus claim, and when you come out saying: “wtf, I never had any say in this!?” I could walk away clean with a “oh yea, that’s true and I knew that was the case from early on, but I paid this hobo 2$ to write down your name, and I had to carry on, just in case you’d want to actually bring the suit anyway”, while pocketing my cut of the case costs.
    - 7y ago
BaitBlock 7y ago
Try out my chrome and firefox extension Baitblock (https://baitblock.app https://baitblock.app). It adds to TL;DR for links on the internet where available. You can also submit them for others so they can save time.
- solarkraft 7y ago
  This is an ad. Don't do that. Submit a "Show HN" instead. (But I'm still taking a look. The premise is wonderful, including that there is a Firefox version, which should be obvious but apparently isn't to many. )

Can someone tl;dr?

I haven't read/grokked the whole thing, but here's a very brief. Class action suit against BP got complicated because the folks who were tasked with finding clients only gathered names of local shrimpers -- not enough to even find those folks again, much less prove damages.

duskwuff 7y ago
And, in many cases, it appears that those folks also gathered names which were either made up or didn't belong to people who were affected. (Some examples in the article included "victims" who were dead, working abroad, and family pets.) A major question in the resulting lawsuit was whether the liability for these errors fell upon the people collecting names, or on the law firm for ignoring the problem after they recognized it.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

fuzzybear3965 7y ago

Expect some loss with this compression... In the wake of the Deepwater Horizon spill, a high-powered class-action attorney hires a team of field agents to recruit disenfranchised gulf fisherman as litigants. The field agents established a network of local recruiters to outsource clientele acquisition. Said agents bumble the solicitation of clients/fisherman, accepting fraudulent documentation from per-head subcontractors ($10 to $50 per litigant found). So, high-powered attorney receives documentation for tens of thousands of fisherman clientele to support his class action.... But, they don't exist. Realizing this, he pursues the case anyway since abandonment disadvantages the small fraction of clientele that are legitimate (in that they are unable to litigate against B.P. in the future). High-powered attorney wins the class action, ensuring to stipulate that no recourse can be had in the event that the clientele are found to be non-existent (the known case). The U.S. government drags high-powered attorney and recruiting staff into criminal court. He defends himself and establishes a defense claiming himself to be a victim of his field agents. Field agents are sentenced to many years in prison and high-powered attorney is found not guilty by a jury of his peers. You may need a TL;DR for this TL;DR.

Judgmentality 7y ago
Wow. This actually inspired me to read the story, because that's crazy.
lonelappde 7y ago
Wow, this is why lawyers have a terrible reputation. Profiting handsomely while coconspirators rot in jail.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- xmprt 7y ago
  Maybe the article is painting him in this light but what other choice did he have? If he dropped the suit then all the legitimate people wouldn't have any recourse. The people who messed up were the field agents.
  - phonon 7y ago
    He could have properly investigated the identity of the claimants at any time. More like he didn't want to know.
  - boublepop 7y ago
    The choice of not breaking the law in collecting names in the first place, of not knowingly going ahead with a case he knew was bogus. His work was a scam from the start, he had the choice to stop or come clean at every point of the way. He’s supposed to ensure the people represented exist. That responsibility shouldn’t go away because he paid some poor runners 10$ to write down the names. Imagine a rule of law where that was a legitimate escape from consequences. I could sue your boss in your name for some made up bogus claim, and when you come out saying: “wtf, I never had any say in this!?” I could walk away clean with a “oh yea, that’s true and I knew that was the case from early on, but I paid this hobo 2$ to write down your name, and I had to carry on, just in case you’d want to actually bring the suit anyway”, while pocketing my cut of the case costs.
  - 7y ago

BaitBlock 7y ago

Try out my chrome and firefox extension Baitblock (https://baitblock.app https://baitblock.app). It adds to TL;DR for links on the internet where available. You can also submit them for others so they can save time.

solarkraft 7y ago
This is an ad. Don't do that. Submit a "Show HN" instead. (But I'm still taking a look. The premise is wonderful, including that there is a Firefox version, which should be obvious but apparently isn't to many. )