07-14-2025, 07:32 AM
I find your first sentence to be in direct conflict with your edited and added last paragraph.
But nonetheless, comparing the 9-11 Victims Compensation Fund (VCF) to the Maui Fire Settlement is quite disingenuous to say the least.
The 9-11 VCF was an act of Congress, introduced weeks after the 9-11 attacks, passed by the Chambers of Congress and signed into law by the President.
There was NO drawn-out court battles that went on and on for years. It was an act of Congress to pay survivors amounts of money based on the victims’ age, lifetime of lost income potential, subsequent health issues of first responders etc. Victims got money in their pockets in mere months after the 9-11 tragedy.
The limit of 10% lawyers’ fees with respect to the 9-11 fund, which has paid out as of today just under 15 billion to all victims and will run through 2090 is really just and proper considering what services the lawyers are providing.
The duties with respect to the 9-11 VCF is really limited to verifying proof of claim. No court cases, hearings, motions, depositions, investigators, court fees, professional witnesses, so on and so forth.
In the case of the Maui Fire, it was a class action lawsuit. It’s been drug out for almost 2 years. The lawyers involved have had to attend numerous court hearings, file motions, conduct depositions, hire investigators, court fees, obtain professional witnesses, so on and so forth. The 25% cap as allowed in the Maui Fire Settlement is really paying for all of that. All of which are costs that have been paid upfront by the various law firms involved.
And to be clear, the Maui Settlement also does have a Special Master overseeing all payouts and lawyers’ fees. That Special Master in both the 9-11 VCF AND the Maui Settlement approves every attorney’s billings and must be in generally accepted rates as set by the judge as well. And let’s remember – it’s a CAP – not a blank check.
At any event, I do love good lawyer jokes!
Try this one:
How many lawyers does it take to change a light bulb?
Whereas the party of the first part, (‘Lawyer”) and the party of the second part, (“Light Bulb”) do hereby and forthwith agree to a transaction wherein the party of the second part shall be removed from the current position as a result of failure to perform previously agreed upon duties, such as the lighting, elucidation, and otherwise illumination of the subject area. Any spillover illumination being at the option of the party of the second part and not required by the aforementioned agreement between the parties.
The aforementioned removal transaction shall include, but not be limited to, the following steps:
1.) The party of the first part shall, with or without elevation, at his option, by means of a chair, stepstool, ladder or any other means of elevation, grasp the party of the second part and rotate the party of the second part in a counterclockwise direction, this point being non-negotiable.
2.) Upon reaching a point where the party of the second part becomes separated from the party of the third part (“Receptacle”) the party of the first part shall have the option of disposing of the party of the second part in a manner consistent with all applicable state, local and federal statutes.
3.) Once separation and disposal have been achieved, the party of the first part shall have the option of beginning installation of the party of the fourth part (“New Light Bulb”) however, this installation shall only occur in a manner consistent with the reverse of the procedures described in step 1.) of this agreement, being careful to note that the rotation should occur in a clockwise direction, this point also being non-negotiable.
4.) The above-described steps may be performed, at the option of the party of the first part, by any or all persons authorized by him, the objective being to produce the most possible revenue for the party of the fifth part (“Partnership”)
But nonetheless, comparing the 9-11 Victims Compensation Fund (VCF) to the Maui Fire Settlement is quite disingenuous to say the least.
The 9-11 VCF was an act of Congress, introduced weeks after the 9-11 attacks, passed by the Chambers of Congress and signed into law by the President.
There was NO drawn-out court battles that went on and on for years. It was an act of Congress to pay survivors amounts of money based on the victims’ age, lifetime of lost income potential, subsequent health issues of first responders etc. Victims got money in their pockets in mere months after the 9-11 tragedy.
The limit of 10% lawyers’ fees with respect to the 9-11 fund, which has paid out as of today just under 15 billion to all victims and will run through 2090 is really just and proper considering what services the lawyers are providing.
The duties with respect to the 9-11 VCF is really limited to verifying proof of claim. No court cases, hearings, motions, depositions, investigators, court fees, professional witnesses, so on and so forth.
In the case of the Maui Fire, it was a class action lawsuit. It’s been drug out for almost 2 years. The lawyers involved have had to attend numerous court hearings, file motions, conduct depositions, hire investigators, court fees, obtain professional witnesses, so on and so forth. The 25% cap as allowed in the Maui Fire Settlement is really paying for all of that. All of which are costs that have been paid upfront by the various law firms involved.
And to be clear, the Maui Settlement also does have a Special Master overseeing all payouts and lawyers’ fees. That Special Master in both the 9-11 VCF AND the Maui Settlement approves every attorney’s billings and must be in generally accepted rates as set by the judge as well. And let’s remember – it’s a CAP – not a blank check.
At any event, I do love good lawyer jokes!
Try this one:
How many lawyers does it take to change a light bulb?
Whereas the party of the first part, (‘Lawyer”) and the party of the second part, (“Light Bulb”) do hereby and forthwith agree to a transaction wherein the party of the second part shall be removed from the current position as a result of failure to perform previously agreed upon duties, such as the lighting, elucidation, and otherwise illumination of the subject area. Any spillover illumination being at the option of the party of the second part and not required by the aforementioned agreement between the parties.
The aforementioned removal transaction shall include, but not be limited to, the following steps:
1.) The party of the first part shall, with or without elevation, at his option, by means of a chair, stepstool, ladder or any other means of elevation, grasp the party of the second part and rotate the party of the second part in a counterclockwise direction, this point being non-negotiable.
2.) Upon reaching a point where the party of the second part becomes separated from the party of the third part (“Receptacle”) the party of the first part shall have the option of disposing of the party of the second part in a manner consistent with all applicable state, local and federal statutes.
3.) Once separation and disposal have been achieved, the party of the first part shall have the option of beginning installation of the party of the fourth part (“New Light Bulb”) however, this installation shall only occur in a manner consistent with the reverse of the procedures described in step 1.) of this agreement, being careful to note that the rotation should occur in a clockwise direction, this point also being non-negotiable.
4.) The above-described steps may be performed, at the option of the party of the first part, by any or all persons authorized by him, the objective being to produce the most possible revenue for the party of the fifth part (“Partnership”)