Can I File the short form before the GCCF decides on my case?

There have been several questions regarding the filing of the Short-Form Joinder or other lawsuit against BP in advance of the April 20 deadline, even where presentment to / denial by the GCCF may arguably not be complete.

Of significance, in this regard, are Paragraphs 8 and 15 of PTO No. 25, which together indicate that consideration of individualized presentment issues will be deferred. Paragraph 15, in particular, provides that:

In answering or otherwise responding to each Master Complaint, no defenses, objections, motions or exceptions for lack of jurisdiction, lack of presentment, mootness, lack of standing, or any other defense that may be specific or unique to any particular plaintiff shall be waived, and all such defenses, objections, motions and/or exceptions specific to any particular plaintiff shall be reserved.

In addition, BP and the other Defendants stipulated to the Short-Form Joinder, including Paragraph 9 of PTO No. 25, which expressly allows a plaintiff to simultaneously assert a Claim in the Limitation and join in the lawsuit against BP and the other defendants by intervening in the B1 and B3 Master Complaint.

Given these provisions, (and for other reasons), we do not see much of a down-side in filing the Short-Form Joinder (or other lawsuit and Claim in Limitation) while at the same time presenting and pursuing claims in the GCCF.

Legally, it seems that the worst thing that happens is that BP is dismissed without prejudice, (or perhaps, in some cases, the entire action could theoretically be dismissed without prejudice), and then you simply re-file when presentment is complete.

As a practical matter, moreover, by the time the Court addresses the issue of presentment in any particular case, the issue will likely be moot, (either because presentment / denial has occurred, or because the case has been resolved in the GCCF).

Of course, we are taking the position that presentment is not even required with respect to the assertion of State Law claims, such as those under the Florida Oil Spill Liability Statutes, or claims under General Maritime Law.

Hope this might be helpful to you and your clients in weighing the options.



	HOME PAGE THE FIRM ATTORNEYS PRACTICE AREAS REPRESENTATIVE CASES OUR CLIENTS FIRM NEWS & EVENTS STAFF & FACILITIES PRESS CONTACT US SEE ALL THE LATEST ON HHKC TV Chinese Drywall Press Conference		Can I File the short form before the GCCF decides on my case? There have been several questions regarding the filing of the Short-Form Joinder or other lawsuit against BP in advance of the April 20 deadline, even where presentment to / denial by the GCCF may arguably not be complete. Of significance, in this regard, are Paragraphs 8 and 15 of PTO No. 25, which together indicate that consideration of individualized presentment issues will be deferred. Paragraph 15, in particular, provides that: In answering or otherwise responding to each Master Complaint, no defenses, objections, motions or exceptions for lack of jurisdiction, lack of presentment, mootness, lack of standing, or any other defense that may be specific or unique to any particular plaintiff shall be waived, and all such defenses, objections, motions and/or exceptions specific to any particular plaintiff shall be reserved. In addition, BP and the other Defendants stipulated to the Short-Form Joinder, including Paragraph 9 of PTO No. 25, which expressly allows a plaintiff to simultaneously assert a Claim in the Limitation and join in the lawsuit against BP and the other defendants by intervening in the B1 and B3 Master Complaint. Given these provisions, (and for other reasons), we do not see much of a down-side in filing the Short-Form Joinder (or other lawsuit and Claim in Limitation) while at the same time presenting and pursuing claims in the GCCF. Legally, it seems that the worst thing that happens is that BP is dismissed without prejudice, (or perhaps, in some cases, the entire action could theoretically be dismissed without prejudice), and then you simply re-file when presentment is complete. As a practical matter, moreover, by the time the Court addresses the issue of presentment in any particular case, the issue will likely be moot, (either because presentment / denial has occurred, or because the case has been resolved in the GCCF). Of course, we are taking the position that presentment is not even required with respect to the assertion of State Law claims, such as those under the Florida Oil Spill Liability Statutes, or claims under General Maritime Law. Hope this might be helpful to you and your clients in weighing the options.