…All the Big Cases.
This article is being posted simultaneously on Insurance Claims Bad Faith Law Blog and on Insurance Claims and Issues Blog.
HSBC was accused by the Federal Government of what amounts to laundering money for terrorists. The Feds settled the HSBC matter although they had good chances of success if they went to trial against HSBC and especially against many of its officers and employees. What trial lawyer would not want to have the prosecution side of a case against terrorists and their sympathizers? Apparently the Feds. See Gretchen Morgenson in her "Fair Game" column published in this morning's Sunday New York Times, "A Bank Too Big to Jail" (posted Online on July 15, 2016), which you can also post in your browser at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/17/business/a-bank-too-big-to-jail.html?ref=business&_r=0. Ms. Morgenson's column features an unofficial report released by Republican staffers of the U.S. House Financial Services Committee without the Committee's approval. Although obviously partisan, it appears that this investigative report offers a lot of actual evidence and not just opinions.
For example, after the Feds decided not to take the HSBC case to trial, they wanted so much to settle with HSBC that they offered immunity from prosecution to HSBC's officers and employees if only HSBC would settle. The HSBC settlement apparently offers a lesson in settling on unfavorable terms. Anyone who has ever settled a case knows that once the other side of a negotiation knows that your side wants to settle badly, that is exactly how your side will almost certainly end up settling, which is badly.
Please Read The Disclaimer. © by Dennis J. Wall. All Rights Reserved.