William Klepper vs. Ace American Insurance, Inc. - 9/24/13

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Tuesday  September 24, 2013 
2:00 PM  EST

2 p.m., 15A05-1212-CC-645. In 2005, William Klepper brought a class action lawsuit against Pernod Ricard, LLC, d/b/a Seagrams Lawrenceburg Distillery (“Pernod”) alleging that emissions from the distillery had discolored and degraded the exterior of nearby buildings.  ACE American Insurance Company (“ACE”) and XL Insurance Company (“XL”) insured Pernod.  In 2009, the Class, Pernod, and XL entered into a settlement agreement, which called for ACE to contribute $3,000,000 toward the $5,200,000 judgment and released Pernod and XL from liability.  ACE did not consent to the settlement, and Klepper, as Pernod’s assignee, sued ACE.  Eventually a special master was appointed to decide six coverage-related issues.  After the special master concluded that Pernod breached the insurance contract by entering into the agreed judgment without ACE’s consent, the trial court adopted the special master’s report and entered final judgment on the six issues decided by the special master.  Klepper now appeals, and ACE cross-appeals.
The Scheduled Panel Members are Judges Barnes, Crone, and, Pyle. Location: Indiana Court of Appeals Courtroom, State House, Room 413, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
 

Back to Events
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Paul Ogden doing a fine job of remembering his peer Gary Welsh with the post below and a call for an Indy gettogether to celebrate Gary .... http://www.ogdenonpolitics.com/2016/05/indiana-loses-citizen-journalist-giant.html Castaways of Indiana, unite!

  2. It's unfortunate that someone has attempted to hijack the comments to promote his own business. This is not an article discussing the means of preserving the record; no matter how it's accomplished, ethics and impartiality are paramount concerns. When a party to litigation contracts directly with a reporting firm, it creates, at the very least, the appearance of a conflict of interest. Court reporters, attorneys and judges are officers of the court and must abide by court rules as well as state and federal laws. Parties to litigation have no such ethical responsibilities. Would we accept insurance companies contracting with judges? This practice effectively shifts costs to the party who can least afford it while reducing costs for the party with the most resources. The success of our justice system depends on equal access for all, not just for those who have the deepest pockets.

  3. As a licensed court reporter in California, I have to say that I'm sure that at some point we will be replaced by speech recognition. However, from what I've seen of it so far, it's a lot farther away than three years. It doesn't sound like Mr. Hubbard has ever sat in a courtroom or a deposition room where testimony is being given. Not all procedures are the same, and often they become quite heated with the ends of question and beginning of answers overlapping. The human mind can discern the words to a certain extent in those cases, but I doubt very much that a computer can yet. There is also the issue of very heavy accents and mumbling. People speak very fast nowadays, and in order to do that, they generally slur everything together, they drop or swallow words like "the" and "and." Voice recognition might be able to produce some form of a transcript, but I'd be very surprised if it produces an accurate or verbatim transcript, as is required in the legal world.

  4. Really enjoyed the profile. Congratulations to Craig on living the dream, and kudos to the pros who got involved to help him realize the vision.

  5. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

ADVERTISEMENT