Hey @CurrentlyHorseless, it has been awhile. Hope you are having a wonderful summer. Doing anything fun?
13 Likes
I had a trainer for a while (and took me a while to realize) that was very good at training horses up through GP, but she was not so good at teaching riders. One time I was having trouble getting my somewhat lazy mare to maintain her canter. Trainer said “you look all locked up and I dont know what to tell you.” I had to suggest to her that she put us on longe line and let me work it out. Problem solved at next lesson. Similar to your situation, but without the screaming.
5 Likes
Nope, CH, you are wrong. Lawsuits often name entities that are only peripherally connected to the actual target of the lawsuit. Heck, my own brother was named in a lawsuit against an organization he volunteered for simply because he was on site when a certain incident occurred – even though he wasn’t anywhere near the exact location of the incident and had absolutely nothing to do with it. He did get dropped from the suit but it cost him $$$$ in attorney fees.
Another case is how an acquaintance was named in a lawsuit because she had just led her horse into an arena at the barn when another person who was riding fell off because her horse spooked at something and bolted. The person who fell sued everyone who was anywhere near that arena because that is the kind of person she was. The acquaintance was able to get out of the lawsuit but she did have to hire an attorney to help her work through it.
Another case in point is how LK was blustering about suing not just 48 Hours but also its “parent,” CBS.
And I would have to go back and read the filings again, but I believe that Mr. D. cited the names and numbers of the various insurance policies and their periods of coverage, and even if the parent company did not itself issue a policy, it totally makes sense to name it for no other reason than to make sure it is aware that its subsidiary may have negligently denied coverage AND to try to obtain in discovery any correspondence or contracts, etc., between the parent and subsidiary about this particular insured or case or other similar cases.
[Edited to correct something I misstated.]
18 Likes
Replying to my own post above. So I have now skimmed through the filings again. There were three known insurance companies named.
• Farm Family Casualty Insurance Company
• American National Insurance Company
• Great American Insurance Company of New York
Great American issued two policies that covered the period in question- a Farm and Ranch Policy and a Farm Catastrophe Liability Policy.
Farm Family issued two policies that covered the period in question – a Special Farm Package “10,” and an additional Business Liability Coverage Policy.
American National is not known to have directly issued a policy but since it is the parent company of Farm Family – who issued two policies - it does not strike me as odd that Mr. D would also name American National in the lawsuit. He is doing what a good lawyer does to try to help his client and even if American National gets off the hook, Mr. D will have at least tried.
23 Likes
I agree with you that lawyers often sue entities only peripherally related, especially if those entities have deep pockets. My previous comment was that Deininger suing a parent company is not similar to Nagle including John Does and ABC Corporations — those are placeholders in case the plaintiff discovers other parties not known at the time the suit was filed.
I’m curious as to which legal entities were the insured of these policies — SGF, MBDressage, or Michael Barisone as an individual.
1 Like
Did you not read the filing?
20 Likes
Your original comment about American National being named in the lawsuit was so you could get in a dig at Mr. D.
Your post from 7/26:
Somehow I was not exactly shocked to learn that Barisone/Deininger were suing an insurance company that had not issued a policy.
I was trying to counter that but of course you had to have the last word. You certainly do like to argue, don’t you?
31 Likes
Someone is getting antsy about the insurance suit. Plus the pressure of another anniversary soon and the lack of attention.
Nothing worth seeing here….
27 Likes
Are you implying that one should read the filing before asking questions that might be answered by reading the filings?
35 Likes
Nah just pester the class for the answers, why bother to do your own homework.
19 Likes
Jesus! Why are any of you engaging in this conversation? It’s exhausting. And it’s pretty obvious that certain people are gleefully perpetuating the nonsense. And no, I don’t mean CH.
14 Likes
Because he was making a closet dig at Mr. D for doing something that is a common legal tactic. And his nonsense shouldn’t be the last thing that people read about this topic. Just scroll on by if you don’t want to read about it.
24 Likes
Perish the thought! 
14 Likes
Haven’t we already established the lack of desire to have a good faith discussion?
21 Likes
I looked at the information on Justia, linked above. According to Justia, Barisone is suing Farm Family Causality Insurance Company and Great American Insurance Company of NY and American National Insurance Company of NY is countersuing Barisone.
1 Like
15 Likes
Hasn’t anyone ever taught you the importance of primary sources when doing research?
22 Likes
Maybe he just read the cliff notes in school and thinks that’s sufficient.
3 Likes
What is your point? That you’re just that clever?
10 Likes
