#Ed rust trial#
As the trial court found, State Farm’s fraudulent practices were consistently directed to persons–poor racial or ethnic minorities, women, and elderly individuals–who State Farm believed would be less likely to object or take legal action. The only purpose for the change was to distort the assessment of the value of Ospital’s claims against State Farm’s insured. Ospital was not speeding, nor did he have a pregnant girlfriend. For over two decades, State Farm set monthly payment caps and individually rewarded those insurance adjusters who paid less than the market value for claims… Agents changed the contents of files, lied to customers, and committed other dishonest and fraudulent acts in order to meet financial goals…For example, a State Farm official in the underlying lawsuit in Logan instructed the claim adjuster to change the report in State Farm’s file by writing that Ospital was "speeding to visit his pregnant girlfriend." …There was no evidence at all to support that assertion. See Court’s Findings, Conclusions and Order Regarding Punitive Damages and Evidentiary Rulings, Campbell, at 17-27. We summarize here three examples from those findings of State Farm ‘s most egregious and malicious behavior.įirst, State Farm repeatedly and deliberately deceived and cheated its customers via the PP&R scheme.
With these standards clearly in mind, the trial court made nearly twenty-eight pages of extensive findings concerning State Farm ‘s reprehensible conduct. … Moreover, "deliberate false statements, acts of affirmative misconduct, or concealment of evidence of improper motive" also warrant larger awards. There, the Supreme Court stated that the defendant’s misconduct is "perhaps the most important indicium of the reasonableness of a punitive damages award." …Repeated "trickery and deceit" targeted at people who are "financially vulnerable" is especially reprehensible and worthy of greater sanctions. It mirrors the "reprehensibility" factor described by the United States Supreme Court in BMW of North America, Inc. This factor specifically analyzes the nature of the defendant’s conduct in terms of its maliciousness, reprehensibility, and wrongfulness. Co., the Utah Supreme Court in 2001 found: is very capable and bright, but is he earning the position or does he just get to keep it because of his dad and long standing family ownership of State Farm’s management?įor example, in the 2001 case of Campbell v. After all, in the United States, we believe in earning leadership rather than being born into it.Įd Rust Jr. I suspect a number of highly qualified agents and claims adjusters wonder why there has been no change in the top management for two generations. Everybody-especially Rust–knows that State Farm Florida is paying millions that would otherwise be profits to State Farm Mutual. He is the chief corporate leader of State Farm Mutual, the corporation that allows its wholly owned subsidiary, State Farm Florida, to essentially lie about its financial situation.
was the person who ultimately decided that thousands of State Farm policyholders would be underpaid or denied benefits in Mississippi. State Farm lost its most significant claims case while Ed Rust Jr.