On February 25, 2011, Pinellas Marine Salvage, Inc. and John Mavrogiannis (“Plaintiffs”) filed their action against Defendants Kenneth R. Feinberg and Feinberg Rozen, LLP, d/b/a Gulf Coast Claims Facility, in the Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit in and for Pinellas County, Florida asserting claims for gross negligence, negligence, negligence per se, fraud, fraudulent inducement, promissory estoppel, and unjust enrichment under Florida state law. The case was subsequently transferred by the JPML to the MDL 2179 Court on August 9, 2011. See Pinellas Marine Salvage, Inc., et al. v. Kenneth R. Feinberg, et al., 2:11-cv-01987.
Pinellas Marine Salvage, Inc., et al. v. Kenneth R. Feinberg, et al. and Selmer M. Salvesen v. Kenneth R. Feinberg, et al. are the only two cases of their kind filed in any court in the country. In each case, the complaint alleges, in part, that Defendants Kenneth R. Feinberg, Feinberg Rozen, LLP, and GCCF misled Plaintiffs by employing a “Delay, Deny, Defend” strategy against them. This strategy, commonly used by unscrupulous insurance companies, is as follows: “Delay payment, starve claimant, and then offer the economically and emotionally-stressed claimant a miniscule percent of all damages to which the claimant is entitled. If the financially ruined claimant rejects the settlement offer, he or she may sue.” In sum, Plaintiffs allege that BP is responsible for the oil spill incident; Feinberg, et al. (independent contractors), via employment of their "Delay, Deny, Defend" strategy, are responsible for not compensating and thereby financially ruining Plaintiffs.
On November 13, 2012, Plaintiffs filed their second motion to remand with the MDL 2179 Court requesting that Judge Barbier remand their case to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, where it was pending before transfer to the BP Oil Spill Court.
In their motion, Plaintiffs argue, in part, they would continue to suffer substantial hardship and inequity if their motion to remand is denied and they continue to be held hostage by a MDL court: (a) where Kenneth R. Feinberg and Feinberg Rozen, LLP, d/b/a Gulf Coast Claims Facility, are not named Defendants in any Master Complaint or Class Action Complaint; and (b) which does not permit formal discovery on Feinberg, et al. Moreover, Plaintiffs point out that the purpose of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is "to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding." Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. As of the date of the filing of this motion, 596 days have passed since Plaintiffs filed their complaint against Feinberg, et al.
Plaintiffs note that the recent common sense, thoughtful opinions of Judge Wilkinson and Judge Reeves are applicable to the Pinellas case. In sum, in Feinberg, et al.’s view, because their relationship with Plaintiffs would not exist “but for” the Deepwater Horizon’s explosion, the Pinellas case (and, presumably, any other case to which Feinberg, et al. could ever be a party) would render Feinberg, et al.’s every potentially actionable decision a federal case, be it related to the claims process at hand or a GCCF employee’s car wreck en route to the office.
Click here to read the Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs’ Second Refiling of Motion to Remand.
Click here to read the complaint.