Brain-damaged woman at center of Wal-Mart suit

[awpitt]

The multi-billion dollar company needs to squeeze out that extra half-a-mill just so they can F these people. I understand that the fine print was there but Wal-Mart needs to grow some values.

- Debbie Shank, 52, suffered severe brain damage in a traffic accident
- Wal-Mart's health plan sued Shank and her family to recoup what it paid out
- The Shanks got money in suit; Wal-Mart says policy means couple can't get benefits
- Couple's son was killed in Iraq after they lost lawsuit to Wal-Mart

Brain-damaged woman at center of Wal-Mart suit - CNN.com

 

[Toxick]

The multi-billion dollar company needs to squeeze out that extra half-a-mill just so they can F these people. I understand that the fine print was there but Wal-Mart needs to grow some values.

Wow - and the husband is a cancer patient working 2 jobs.

It's raining #### in Missouri.



Walmart is well within their rights to do what they're doing.

But I think it takes a stock-pile of Major Grade-A Asshats to actually DO IT. I'm surprised that the PR department is allowing this to happen. Aren't they supposed to be so "family oriented"? This makes Walmart look really bad. It makes them look like the EVIL CORPORATION that everyone says they are.

 

[nobody really]

they were talking about this on T-Bone and Heather is am. Its absurd

 

[HouseCat]

they were talking about this on T-Bone and Heather is am. Its absurd

I caught that too! Funny what she was saying about the Waltons....they could find $277k under the couch cushions. I hope someone somewhere does right by these unfortunate people.

Whoever the pencil-neck, loser is who is enforcing this from their corporate office needs a kick in the happy sacks. Unbelievable!

 

[awpitt]

Wow - and the husband is a cancer patient working 2 jobs.

It's raining #### in Missouri.



Walmart is well within their rights to do what they're doing.

But I think it takes a stock-pile of Major Grade-A Asshats to actually DO IT. I'm surprised that the PR department is allowing this to happen. Aren't they supposed to be so "family oriented"? This makes Walmart look really bad. It makes them look like the EVIL CORPORATION that everyone says they are.

...and their son was killed in Iraq. I agree with you that the fine print in the employment agreement support Wal-Mart but you're also right about Wal-Mart proving all the critics right when they act like the evil corp they really are. I like shopping at out local WalPlex it's cheap and convienent but this story may cause me to take my shopping elsewhere in addition to writting a letter or two.

 

[itsbob]

Bad Bad Wal-Mart.. why isn't anyone #####ing about the lawyers??

were awarded about $1 million in a lawsuit against the trucking company involved in the crash. After legal fees were paid, $417,000 was placed in a trust

She's BRAIN DAMAGED.. and THEY get 600k??


WalMart just trying to recover money they paid out, but the lawyers get 60%??

 

[itsbob]

THEN they are upset that the Supreme court won't hear the case?? Morons.. you think the lawyers that already took 600K are going to take the case to the Supreme Court for FREE!??

They win(not going to happen) then they get the legal bill for an additional 1.5M.. when they only have 412K left from the last time the lawyers raped them.

AND it was the SAME lawyers that informed Wal Mart about the award in the first place... Wal Mart never would have known to re-coup the money if the same shyster didn't actually provide them with the information. Telling them. , "Wal-Mart won't try to recoup the money from the award" even though all the legal documents say Wal-Mart can and will...

It's not Wal-Mart they should be pissed at.

 

[PsyOps]

THEN they are upset that the Supreme court won't hear the case?? Morons.. you think the lawyers that already took 600K are going to take the case to the Supreme Court for FREE!??

They win(not going to happen) then they get the legal bill for an additional 1.5M.. when they only have 412K left from the last time the lawyers raped them.

AND it was the SAME lawyers that informed Wal Mart about the award in the first place... Wal Mart never would have known to re-coup the money if the same shyster didn't actually provide them with the information. Telling them. , "Wal-Mart won't try to recoup the money from the award" even though all the legal documents say Wal-Mart can and will...

It's not Wal-Mart they should be pissed at.

you're right. I just did the math and for this family to only have $277k left from a potential $1.4 million, they are being lawyered to death.

 

[jetmonkey]

- Couple's son was killed in Iraq after they lost lawsuit to Wal-Mart

Did Walmart kill their son?

 

[cattitude]

Did Walmart kill their son?

No, silly. Bush did.

 

[BillnChristi]

I would have to agree that WalMart is legally right in what they are doing however there are some questions that need to be answered.

1. Who actually sued? Was it WalMart or their insurance company?

2. If it was WalMart, what did they do with the money? Did the money go back to the insurance company to keep insurance companies from increasing benefit rates for other and future employees? (which I find unlikely) However, if this is the case, this is the only reason why I can see WalMart being justifed. If they just pocketed the money then it absolutely insane.

3. If this had been an actual on-the-job injury would WalMart being able to sue for monies they would have had to pay out in the first place. Lets say for example someone gets hurt at WalMart due to poor working conditions. The Employee sues WalMart and wins and then WalMart turns around and sues them back for money they just paid out for the Employees medical expenses they had to initially pay. It seems to me that the statement in the benefits package that allows them to re-coup monies from settlements should not be allowed.

All in all, I STRONGLY DISAGREE with what WalMart has done even though they are legally right. I think they should step up to the plate and admit what they have done is unacceptable and explain that they aren't going to pursue the monies even though they have legal rights to do so.

Personally, if I could afford to shop elsewhere, I would. I have in some instances switched to Target and BJ's. If someone else like K-Mart or Target could REALLY be competetive with WalMart then I would stop going there all-together.

I wish the family the best of luck and hopefully WalMart will do the right thing.

 

[itsbob]

It seems to me that the statement in the benefits package that allows them to re-coup monies from settlements should not be allowed.

Why single out Wal-MArt.. almost EVERY insurance company has the same statement.. including gov't health plans, tri-care, and even those covered under active duty medical care.

 

[AiryT]

Why single out Wal-MArt.. almost EVERY insurance company has the same statement.. including gov't health plans, tri-care, and even those covered under active duty medical care.

That may be true, but I know several people who have been injured and received settlements while insured under a government insurance plan, and not once where they sued for the monies the plan payed out.

 

[itsbob]

That may be true, but I know several people who have been injured and received settlements while insured under a government insurance plan, and not once where they sued for the monies the plan payed out.

Probably because THEIR lawyers didn't inform the gov't or the insurance company about the award.

I mean, what kind of lawyer would tell a company, that "We won, this is how much money they left for you to take!!"

 

[AiryT]

Probably because THEIR lawyers didn't inform the gov't or the insurance company about the award.

I mean, what kind of lawyer would tell a company, that "We won, this is how much money they left for you to take!!"

You're probably right about that. I question this lawyers ethics. His/her fees seem excessive to me. But, I still think Walmart should create some good PR for themselves and back down on this one, or at least if they receive the award, donate it back to the family. Geez, they could write it off.

 

[jetmonkey]

Walmart is a business, not a charity; you sure love those low prices, don't you?

 

[AiryT]

Walmart is a business, not a charity; you sure love those low prices, don't you?

Tell me something I don't know. They donate to other charities. I don't shop at Walmart, I don't like that store.

 

[Baja28]

Bad Bad Wal-Mart.. why isn't anyone #####ing about the lawyers??

She's BRAIN DAMAGED.. and THEY get 600k??

WalMart just trying to recover money they paid out, but the lawyers get 60%??

THEN they are upset that the Supreme court won't hear the case?? Morons.. you think the lawyers that already took 600K are going to take the case to the Supreme Court for FREE!??

They win(not going to happen) then they get the legal bill for an additional 1.5M.. when they only have 412K left from the last time the lawyers raped them.

AND it was the SAME lawyers that informed Wal Mart about the award in the first place... Wal Mart never would have known to re-coup the money if the same shyster didn't actually provide them with the information. Telling them. , "Wal-Mart won't try to recoup the money from the award" even though all the legal documents say Wal-Mart can and will...

It's not Wal-Mart they should be pissed at.

you're right. I jsut did the math and for this family to only have $277k left from a potential $1.4 million, they are being lawyered to death.

Am I doing the math right?

$1,000,000.00 - award
<330,000.00> - Taxes (assuming 33%)
670,000.00 - left
<330,00.00> to pay lawyer fees (assuming 33%)
$340,000.00 - left after taxes and legal fees.

If they got $412,000.00, they either sheltered some from taxes or the lawyers didn't charge the usual 33% fee. :shrug:

 

[itsbob]

Am I doing the math right?

$1,000,000.00 - award
<330,000.00> - Taxes (assuming 33%)
670,000.00 - left
<330,00.00> to pay lawyer fees (assuming 33%)
$340,000.00 - left after taxes and legal fees.

If they got $412,000.00, they either sheltered some from taxes or the lawyers didn't charge the usual 33% fee. :shrug:

I wouldn't think a settlement to payback medical fees etc, would be taxable..

It's not income.

 

[Baja28]

I wouldn't think a settlement to payback medical fees etc, would be taxable..

It's not income.

I wondered that too. I really don't know.