J.T. THORPE SETTLEMENT TRUST TOLLING PERIOD
At the July 24, 2007 Trustee meeting, a resolution was passed which stated that the TDP and all other Plan Documents, as necessary, were to be amended to provide that all claims not barred by the applicable statute of limitations or repose at the Petition Date, as determined in Section 5.2 of the TDP, would be tolled as of the Petition Date (February 12, 2002) through and including October 16, 2007, without the need for the claimant to take any action..
INTERROGATORY REQUIREMENTS PER TDP SEC 6.2(a)
The Trustee, TAC, and Futures Representative at the April, 2007 Trustee meeting reviewed the general status of claim submissions and the supporting materials being provided. It is the consensus of the Trustee, TAC, and the Futures Representative that Section 6.2 (a) of the TDP needs to be followed by all claimants.
TDP Section 6.2(a) requires claims to be submitted with San Francisco Superior Court General Order 129 Form Interrogatories, Set 1 and Set 2. The Trust with the consent of the Trustee, TAC and Futures Representative has “Trust Abbreviated Interrogatories” on the Trust website. The abbreviated interrogatories can be used in place of the San Francisco Superior Court General Order 129. Other forms of interrogatories may be accepted by the Trust if they contain the same information as the abbreviated interrogatories on our website. Any current or future claims submitted without interrogatories will be deemed deficient and returned to the law firm.
J.T. Thorpe Settlement Trust – Post-Repair Shipboard Exposures
J.T. Thorpe Settlement Trust’s claims assessment process – the process by which the Trust develops and applies interpretations of the Trust Distribution Procedures and other processes governing claim liquidations — is claim and fact driven. Recently, the Trust Advisory Committee brought to the Trust’s attention a potential issue – not yet raised in any claim submitted to the Trust — regarding whether and, if so, under what circumstances, post-repair shipboard exposure claims could be liquidated under terms presently governing claims liquidation.
The Trust has investigated the issue and discussed it at two Trust meetings. It has concluded the following:
There is no historical basis grounded in J.T. Thorpe, Inc.’s experience in the tort system for evaluating and resolving these types of claims and no such claims have been submitted to this trust. The Trust has concluded that it would be inappropriate to attempt to establish a set of rules specific to post-repair shipboard claims beyond the rules set forth in the Trust Distribution Procedures and Matrix at this time. Any claims must be assessed on their evidence on a case by case basis.
The Trust can confirm, however, that while there may be differences in the evidentiary requirements and application of criteria to post-repair shipboard and land-based claims arising from factual differences between the types of claims (e.g., differences in the historical development of claims in the tort system and physical differences relating to the nature, location, and typical longevity of the work), the Trust finds no prohibition against post-repair shipboard claims in the governing distribution procedures and principles. Specifically, the Trust finds nothing in the Dumin case to preclude such claims. As with all claims, all relevant facts will be taken into account in assessing claims.
It is up to a potential claimant and/or the individual attorney representing a potential claimant to evaluate the evidence and to submit a claim if the claimant and/or the attorney believe there is a valid claim. Post-repair shipboard exposure claims should include, at a minimum and among other required supporting documents, the claimant’s sea records which show dates onboard the ship and the claimant’s occupation or where the claimant worked on the ship, as well as other independent documents of the ship’s history to support the claimant’s exposure to J.T. Thorpe, Inc.’s product or operations.
Amendment to Case Valuation Matrix
An amendment to Section VII d of the Case Valuation Matrix has been approved. The amendment includes: 1) the method by which minimum exposure periods may be calculated (calendar months, calendar days, work days, or work hours); 2) pro-rata awards for certain exposure periods less than the minimum period; 3) blended exposure rates; and 4) allocation of exposure time at multiple sites.