Buffalo Creek Disaster Rough Draft
The buffalo creek disaster is one of the worst coal mining incidents in the history of the united states. The Book Buffalo Creek disaster written by Gerald Stern is an expose on the wrongdoings of the NewYork based Pittston company but also a summation of the events leading to the 13.5-million-dollar settlement awarded to the victims. The book also serves the purpose of a basic depiction of how the court systems in America work. Gerald Stern served as a champion for the victims of the flood. With his background in civil rights cases, Stern could empathize with the flood victims and use his expertise to navigate the court systems and the Pittston company. Stern was devoted to the idea that the Pittston Company …show more content…
Reducing liability for shareholders helps create a corporate veil. Pittston claimed that it was merely a stockholder, so they would be protected from being prosecuted thus making it harder for Stern to “ pierce the corporate veil”. “A Pittston brief pointed out “A planted seeking to persuade a court to ignore separate corporate entries must not show only an excessive degree of control over the subsidiary, but the purposeful exercise of that importer dominance to commit…()”.Stern had to tackle this issue. He knew that if he sued the Buffalo Mining Company the case would be reduced to a state court and the coal mining companies would have too many connections as opposed to a federal court(Stern,71).To deter this first, he needed to secure the documents from the AdHoc company proving that the Buffalo Mining Company was a division of the Pittston Company. The key word was division. To Stern division does not mean separate but a part of. Stern found the evidence needed on stationary of the Buffalo Mining Company that stated:” A division of a Pittston Company” and a sign with a similar statement(Stern,75). Additionally, Stern also had evidence that there was little to no documentation of board and shareholder meetings. The minutes submitted stated …show more content…
Most of the modern day legal system is based on precedents which are used as a guideline for Judges to make consistent rulings. The Pittston company already had an advantage when it came to precedents in the West Virginia Court System. To set the scene, the Pittston Company believed that 33 of the plaintiffs should be dismissed because none of them were in immediate danger during the flood or saw someone in immediate danger, therefore, the psychic impairment claim should be dismissed(Stern,219). Stern could have complied, but he felt that Judge Hall would essentially undermine all the psychic impairment claims of those who were not directly affected by the flood( in the water, or saw no one in the water)(Stern, 220). Stern had his work cut out for him. To undermine him the Pittston company used a case in 1899. where the Virginia Court system overturned a verdict of Claude Davis on the backing that he had suffered mental injury with no physical injury,” Mental suffering alone, and unaccompanied by other injury, cannot sustain in action for damages or be considered as an element of damages”(Stern,222). Pittston also used the 1945 case of Theresa Monteleone after she was awarded then stripped of her 5000$ reward due to the fact the courts decided that there was no correlation between the scars that the shattered glass made on her face and mental illness( Stern,223). Pittston
The buffalo creek disaster is one of the worst coal mining incidents in the history of the united states. The Book Buffalo Creek disaster written by Gerald Stern is an expose on the wrongdoings of the NewYork based Pittston company but also a summation of the events leading to the 13.5-million-dollar settlement awarded to the victims. The book also serves the purpose of a basic depiction of how the court systems in America work. Gerald Stern served as a champion for the victims of the flood. With his background in civil rights cases, Stern could empathize with the flood victims and use his expertise to navigate the court systems and the Pittston company. Stern was devoted to the idea that the Pittston Company …show more content…
Reducing liability for shareholders helps create a corporate veil. Pittston claimed that it was merely a stockholder, so they would be protected from being prosecuted thus making it harder for Stern to “ pierce the corporate veil”. “A Pittston brief pointed out “A planted seeking to persuade a court to ignore separate corporate entries must not show only an excessive degree of control over the subsidiary, but the purposeful exercise of that importer dominance to commit…()”.Stern had to tackle this issue. He knew that if he sued the Buffalo Mining Company the case would be reduced to a state court and the coal mining companies would have too many connections as opposed to a federal court(Stern,71).To deter this first, he needed to secure the documents from the AdHoc company proving that the Buffalo Mining Company was a division of the Pittston Company. The key word was division. To Stern division does not mean separate but a part of. Stern found the evidence needed on stationary of the Buffalo Mining Company that stated:” A division of a Pittston Company” and a sign with a similar statement(Stern,75). Additionally, Stern also had evidence that there was little to no documentation of board and shareholder meetings. The minutes submitted stated …show more content…
Most of the modern day legal system is based on precedents which are used as a guideline for Judges to make consistent rulings. The Pittston company already had an advantage when it came to precedents in the West Virginia Court System. To set the scene, the Pittston Company believed that 33 of the plaintiffs should be dismissed because none of them were in immediate danger during the flood or saw someone in immediate danger, therefore, the psychic impairment claim should be dismissed(Stern,219). Stern could have complied, but he felt that Judge Hall would essentially undermine all the psychic impairment claims of those who were not directly affected by the flood( in the water, or saw no one in the water)(Stern, 220). Stern had his work cut out for him. To undermine him the Pittston company used a case in 1899. where the Virginia Court system overturned a verdict of Claude Davis on the backing that he had suffered mental injury with no physical injury,” Mental suffering alone, and unaccompanied by other injury, cannot sustain in action for damages or be considered as an element of damages”(Stern,222). Pittston also used the 1945 case of Theresa Monteleone after she was awarded then stripped of her 5000$ reward due to the fact the courts decided that there was no correlation between the scars that the shattered glass made on her face and mental illness( Stern,223). Pittston