Justice FOR ALL? NOT in Ohio!
This is a follow up of the Elevators Mutual Insurance v. O’Flaherty’s Restaurant case in Ohio. This case typifies how BIG Insurance companies are in collusion with state investigators to deprive innocent Insureds of their valid claims!
This is an update on the civil case of Elevators Mutual Insurance v. O’Flaherty’s Restaurant. This is the third installment which is attempting to inform the general public of the corruption within the judiciary in the state of Ohio. This corruption is partly because retiree judges are utilized to assist the growing caseload of the Courts of Common Pleas.
These retiree judges, such as Judge Paul Moon, who is the featured judge in this case, get paid an enormous hourly wage to sit and rule on cases they find to be tedious. Subsequently, innocent Insureds who are counting on the judicial system for a fair chance at trial are defeated before they ever get to court. In the aforementioned case Judge moon first ruled that the Insurer Affinity Mutual Insurance did not conduct a one sided directed investigation.
SHOP at AMAZON.COM OR KINDLE EBOOKS FOR THEIR LATEST TOP SELLING TITLES LIKE: “STACIE WILDE’S WILDE TIMES”…….A WILD RIDE………JACK THE SURFER DUDE (CHILDREN’S BOOK)….JACK THE SURFER DUDE, HANG TEN……POETRY OF LIFE……COLLECTIVE WORKS OF A GENIUS…..COLLECTIVE WORKS OF POETRY” ALL AVAILABLE IN PRINTED FORM OR ON KINDLE!!!
Did he read the relative motions and documentation? He says YES, I say NO WAY! Because anyone with a modicum of intelligence can easily see that the Insurer Affinity Mutual Insurance (formerly Elevators Mutual) failed to investigate any other suspect. Additionally, they failed (by the admission of their own investigator) to conduct a valid scientific investigation. They did not discover the indisputable area of Origin. They failed to identify a first fuel ignited (there was NO known incendiary liquid discovered). They failed to utilize any known, peer review and/or tested form of scientific analysis during their investigation. They violated some 20 different areas of known NFPA 921 standards during their investigation. and they colluded with the former fire marshal Keith Loreno.
In recent rulings, Retiree Moon, ruled that the Insurer did not spoliate the fire scene. He made this extremely questionable ruling after supposedly reviewing evidentiary documents which show a 600 sq. ft. area demolished by the Insurer! When asked why they destroyed this area, they said they were conducting an inventory! Yet, when asked to produce evidence of this inventory they failed to do so. Then they changed their story to state that they destroyed that area to gain entrance to the building. However, the other investigator, Loreno stated under oath he had full access to these areas, and did not have to demolish anything.
Judges in Ohio seem encouraged by the statement made by the Ohio Supreme Court that Summary Judgment motions should be utilized when possible for the sake of “Judicial Economy”. I would state that if Mr. and Mrs. Heyman have had to wait ELEVEN (11) YEARS to have their case heard at trial, Judicial economy is no longer an issue.
Also, in ruling in favor of a proposed Summary Judgment Motion, a judge must be able to determine that there are NO Factual issues in dispute. In both of Judge Moon’s Summary Judgment motions in favor of the Insurer, there was indisputable disagreement as to factual issues, with some evidence for both sides. Therefore, I find it more than questionable that a judge (who is new to the case) could rule that Summary judgment is appropriate in either of these cases. Of course the judge will say “then appeal my decision”. This of course, is inappropriate, and a judge usurping the responsibilities of the jury in favor of the wealthy Insurer!
The innocent Insureds in this case Richard and Jan Heyman, lost everything they ever owned in this fire. The Insurer Elevators Mutual (who changed their name to Affinity Mutual) even sent two registered letters denying their involvement in this demolition. One letter was sent to the Insured’s attorney, and the second to the Commissioner of Insurance. That is and of itself is a BAD FAITH issue!
How is an innocent victim of runaway litigation to receive a Fair Trial, when you are forced to suffer the incompetence of a judge who should be far away from the bench trimming his roses or something. ELEVEN YEARS Mr. and Mrs. Heyman have suffered at the hands of incompetent public employees and elected officials. The evidence documentation in this case is exhaustive, and detailed. The prosecution and investigators were biased and failed to conduct a valid, scientific investigation based on facts, rather than innuendo.
Next, the Insureds had to deal with incompetence from the Judiciary who evidently fail to read briefs submitted by attorneys, and/or review evidence readily available. All this time, two innocent victims of the incompetence of the judicial system must suffer further humiliation and degradation at the hands of the almighty judge.
It is time that someone takes a stand and demand that the prosecution and the judiciary be held responsible for their inefficiency and incompetence. Previous court rulings have established legal precedents for marginal legal mentalities to read, review and FOLLOW! Instead these self proclaimed “triers of facts” go about playing god with the lives of those who simply want a fair shake in court. There has to be a price to be paid for ones ignorance of established facts and legal precedents.
Judges Harry Sargeant from Sandusky County, Ohio, and Judge Paul Moon from Ottawa County, Ohio are two such “triers of facts” who fail to follow the accepted and previously determined rules of law. These types of judges will openly, and candidly state at trial “well, if I am wrong, file an appeal”. That is an indication of the level of security,and autonomy they feel they have as part of the “CLUB”. Lawyers and the Bar association have to start policing their own, or possibly Congress will have to do it for them! But then as you well know: “They Can’t Take the Truth!”