JPMorgan Ordered to Pay More Than $4 Billion to Widow and Family

JPMorgan Chase & Co. was ordered by a Dallas jury to pay more than $4 billion in damages for mishandling the estate of a former American Airlines executive, but the verdict will probably be knocked down on appeal.

Jo Hopper and two stepchildren won the probate court verdict over claims that JPMorgan mismanaged the administration of the estate of Max Hopper, who was described as an airline technology innovator in a statement issued by the family’s law firm.

Large punitive damages verdicts like the one in the Hopper case are often scaled back because the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled they can’t be disproportionate to actual damages. In this case, the jury awarded less than $5 million in actual damages.

The bank said it acted in a professional manner and in good faith on Hopper’s estate and is “highly confident” the jury verdict won’t stand under Texas law.

“Clearly the award far exceeds any possible interpretation of Texas tort reform statutes,” Andrew Gray, a spokesman for the bank, said in an emailed statement. “There has been no judgment entered by the court based on this verdict.”

Max Hopper, who pioneered a reservation system for the airline, died in 2010 with assets of more than $19 million but without a will and testament, according to the statement. JPMorgan was hired as an administrator to divvy up the assets among family members.

Putters, Wine

“Instead of independently and impartially collecting and dividing the estate’s assets, the bank took years to release basic interests in art, home furnishings, jewelry, and notably, Mr. Hopper’s collection of 6,700 golf putters and 900 bottles of wine,” the family’s lawyers said in the statement. “Some of the interests in the assets were not released for more than five years.”

"The nation’s largest bank horribly mistreated me and this verdict provides protection to others from being mistreated by banks that think they’re too powerful to be held accountable," Jo Hopper said in the statement.

The court’s verdict form shows jurors awarded $8 billion in punitive damages against the bank. Alan Loewinsohn, attorney for Jo Hopper, said in an interview there may be duplication of some of the damage findings. As a result, he said, the punitive damage award could end up being “somewhere between $4 billion and $8 billion.”

Loewinsohn said he asked the jury to take into account the bank’s worth and asked them for $2 billion in punitive damages. “I believe they used that figure for the other parties in the case as well,” he said.

Fiduciary Duty

The jury found that the bank committed fraud, breached its fiduciary duty and broke a fee agreement, according to court papers.

At the lower end of that range, the jury’s award would erase almost two-thirds of the $6.6 billion profit that JPMorgan generated globally during the second quarter.
And it would rank high among the largest sanctions ever levied against the bank -- somewhere between the $2.6 billion it agreed to pay in 2014 for allegedly failing to stop Bernard Madoff’s Ponzi scheme, and a $13 billion settlement it reached with government authorities in 2013 for its handling of mortgage bonds that fueled the financial crisis.
The verdict form shows jurors were advised to consider factors including “the net worth of JPMorgan.” Indeed, the bank has a stock market value of about $330 billion.

Full Article & Source:
JPMorgan Ordered to Pay More Than $4 Billion to Widow and Family

Connecticut Supreme Court upholds ruling that teen must undergo chemo

The Connecticut Supreme Court upheld a prior ruling Thursday that a 17-year-old cancer patient cannot refuse chemotherapy treatment for Hodgkin's lymphoma.

The state argued that the teen lacked competency extended to maturity and that they did not believe she understood the severity of her prognosis. Her mother and her mother's lawyer said they expect to go back to trial court to more fully explore the mature minor argument.

The teen, who is identified in court documents as “Cassandra C.,” but was identified by police as Cassandra Callender in a November missing persons report, was diagnosed with Hodgkin’s lymphoma in September. At the time, doctors at the Connecticut Children’s Medical Center (CCMC) recommended she receive chemotherapy.

Cassandra ran away after two treatments in November and, with the support of her mother, refused any more when she returned. After the hospital reported Cassandra’s mother, Jackie Fortin, the Connecticut Department of Children and Families (DCF) took temporary custody of the teen, and her mother was ordered to cooperate with medical care administered under the agency’s supervision.

The teen believes the chemotherapy will do more damage to her body than the cancer will, according to the Hartford Courant. Doctors have said the teen has an 80 to 85 percent chance of living -- with six months of chemotherapy treatment, according to Fox News’ legal analyst Peter Johnson Jr.

After the arguments Thursday, Fortin said she would not allow her daughter to die. The single mother said she and her daughter want to seek alternative treatments that don't include putting the "poison" of chemotherapy into her daughter's body.

"This is her decision and her rights, which is what we are here fighting about," Fortin said. "We should have choices about what to do with our bodies."

Fortin and her lawyer said they are considering the next step after losing the case.

The teen’s doctors testified at a trial court hearing after which the DCF was authorized to make medical decisions on her behalf. The teen and her mother appealed the ruling, claiming it violates their constitutional right and that the state should recognize the “mature minor doctrine.”

The doctrine permits a minor who exhibits the maturity of an adult to make decisions reserved for those who attained the age of majority, meaning 18. Cassandra turns 18 in September. Johnson, who himself battled Hodgkin's disease at age 18, disagrees that it should apply to Cassandra.

“The family is wrong on the law, and wrong on the ethics, and wrong on the humanity,” he told Fox & Friends’ Peter Doocy.

“Wrong on the law, first of all, the state of Connecticut has an obligation to preserve life of an infant. The state of Connecticut has an obligation to prevent suicide. If she does not get this treatment, this is a form of suicide, and frankly the American Civil Liberties Union is complicit in her death if she dies,” Johnson said.

Lymphoma is a type of blood cancer that affects the body’s lymphatic system, specifically the white blood cells that help the body fight infection and disease. A form of chemotherapy, radiation therapy or a combination of the two is typically used to treat Hodgkin's lymphoma, according to the Lymphoma Research Foundation.

Prior to the ruling, Johnson said the state’s Supreme Court will have to decide whether to send the case back down to a lower court for another hearing to determine the competency of the mother and of the child in terms of making the decision to halt treatment.

“Do 16- and 17-year-old children have the judgment, the perspective, the discretion, the experience to be making these life and death decisions? I say they do not,” Johnson said.

Fortin told the Hartford Courant that even prior to her diagnosis, Cassandra would have opted not to undergo chemotherapy.

“This is her decision, and she’s very intelligent enough to make this decision on her own,” Fortin said. “She does not want poisons in her body, and she does not want to be forced through the state or the government to force her to do such a thing. And right now, at this moment, she is being forced chemo upon her against her wish.”

Full Article & Source:
Connecticut Supreme Court upholds ruling that teen must undergo chemo