- Audrey Hirt: Died at age 81 on March 13, 2009, leaving behind a trust of $60 million.
- F.W. Hirt: The husband of Audrey Hirt. He died at age 81 on July 13, 2007. He was the chairman of the board of Erie Indemnity Co., the management arm of Erie Insurance Group, and a longtime chief executive of Erie Indemnity.
- H.O. Hirt: F.W. Hirt’s father and Audrey Hirt’s father-in-law. He cofounded Erie Insurance Group in 1925 and later gained full control of the company. He died at age 95 in 1982.
- Laurel A. Hirt: The younger daughter of Audrey Hirt and F.W. Hirt, who had two children. The 51-year-old lives in Millcreek Township. She is a co-executor of her mother’s estate and a trustee of her mother’s trust.
- Elizabeth A. Vorsheck: The older daughter of Audrey Hirt and F.W. Hirt. The 54-year-old lives in Florida and is a director of Erie Indemnity Co. She is also one of three members of two trusts that control the majority of the voting stock of Erie Indemnity Co. Vorsheck has taken court action to try to remove her sister as co-executor of their mother’s estate and as a trustee of their mother’s trust.
- Erie County Judge Stephanie Domitrovich: As the judge who handles most cases in Erie County Orphans’ Court, she must decide whether to remove Laurel Hirt as a co-executor and a trustee. She has set an April 9 deadline for Hirt and Vorsheck to resolve their dispute through mediation.
- National City Bank, now part of PNC Bank: The other remaining trustee of the Audrey Hirt trust. National City and PNC have joined Vorsheck’s request to have Laurel Hirt removed as a co-executor and a trustee.
- Pennsylvania Attorney General Tom Corbett: His office is involved because the dispute over the Audrey Hirt trust includes 40 charities that are beneficiaries. Corbett’s office has joined Vorsheck’s request to have Laurel Hirt removed as a co-executor and a trustee.
- Susan Hirt Hagen: The only daughter of H.O. Hirt and a trustee of the trusts that control Erie Indemnity’s voting stock.
- Thomas B. Hagen: Susan Hagen’s husband, and chairman of the board of Erie Indemnity Co. and a former chief executive of the company.
- Roger Richards: Personal lawyer to the Hagens. An Erie resident and well-known Republican fundraiser, he brokered the agreement that Vorsheck, Laurel Hirt, the Attorney General’s Office and others in the case would try mediation. Richards personally spoke to Corbett, whom Richards is supporting in his GOP gubernatorial bid, about trying mediation.
- Michael Palmisano: Retired Erie County judge and a mediator in the dispute between Vorsheck and Laurel Hirt.
Welcome to the web sites of the Globe Gazette, a media company located in eastern Iowa. We believe in your right to know what information is collected during your visit to our web sites and how the information is used and safeguarded.
Information Gathered by Voluntary Submission
To make use of certain features on our websites (such as contests, story comments, personalized web pages and other interactive forums) visitors need to register and to provide certain information as part of the registration or participation process. (We may ask, for example, for your name, email address, sex, age, and zip code, and we might request information on your interest in sports, personal finance, the performing arts, and the like.)
The information you supply will help us to offer you more personalized features, to tailor our sites to your interests and make them more useful to you. The more you tell us about yourself, the more value we can offer you. Supplying such information is entirely voluntary. But if you don’t supply the information we need, we may be unable to provide you with services we make available to other visitors to our sites. Of course, even if you want to remain completely anonymous, you’re still free to take advantage of the wealth of content available on our sites without registration.
Information Automatically Gathered About All Visitors
We collect aggregate and user-specific information on what pages consumers access or visit. This information is used to generate reports that help the Globe Gazette assess the value of and interest in the various web sites. The information we collect is used by us to improve the content of our web page. We can build a better site if we know which pages our users are visiting and how often.
Our web servers automatically collect limited information about your computer’s connection to the Internet, including your IP address but not the e-mail address, when you visit our sites. Your IP address does not identify you personally. We use this information to deliver our web pages to you upon request, to tailor our sites to the interests of our users, and to measure traffic within our sites.
To help make our sites more responsive to the needs of our visitors, we may utilize a standard feature of browser software, called a “cookie”. The cookie doesn’t actually identify the visitor, just the computer that a visitor uses to access our site. A cookie can’t read data off your hard drive. Our advertisers or content partners may also assign their own cookies to your browser, a process that we cannot control. We use cookies to help us tailor our site to your needs, to deliver a better, more personalized service. It is a cookie, for example, that allows us to deliver your personalized stock quotes each time you visit a site.
Information Shared With Other Organizations
When we present information to our advertisers — to help them understand our audience and confirm the value of advertising on our websites — it is usually in the form of aggregated statistics on traffic to various pages within our sites. We will not share individual user information with third parties unless the user has specifically approved the release of that information.
Special Attention to Children
Children should always get permission from their parents before sending any information about themselves (such as their names, email addresses, and phone numbers) over the Internet, to us or to anyone else. We do not specifically collect information about children. We encourage parents to review and share safety tips with their children participating in the online experience.
A final note:
The Globe Gazette is affiliated with other online companies, some of which feature our branding. This policy statement does not apply to those companies’ web sites; please refer to these affiliated sites to obtain information on their privacy policies. If you can’t find the privacy policy of any of these sites via a link from the site’s homepage, you should contact the site directly for more information.
The Web is an evolving medium. If we need to change our privacy policy at some point in the future, we’ll post the changes before they take effect. Of course, our use of information gathered while the current policy is in effect will always be consistent with the current policy, even if we change that policy later.
A three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held March 15 that a court — not insurance companies — will determine whether two insurance companies have to pay defense costs for R. Allen Stanford and three other former Stanford Financial Group (SFG) executives who face criminal charges and civil litigation.
The civil litigation filed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the federal criminal charges stem from allegations that the former SFG executives conspired to defraud investors who bought about $7 million in certificates of deposit sold through Stanford International Bank Ltd. The criminal case, United States v. Robert Allen Stanford, et al. is pending in U.S. District Judge David Hittner’s court in the Southern District of Texas in Houston. The civil case, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Stanford International Bank Ltd., et al., is pending before U.S. District Judge David Godbey of the Northern District of Texas in Dallas. Stanford and the other three executives, Laura Pendergest-Holt, Gilberto Lopez Jr. and Mark Kuhrt, have pleaded not guilty to the criminal charges against them and deny the allegations in the civil suit.
The insurance companies had appealed a Jan. 25 preliminary injunction Hittner issued in Laura Pendergest-Holt, et al. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyds of London, et al. Hittner ordered Certain Underwriters at Lloyds of London and Arch Specialty Insurance Co. to advance defense costs to the four former SFG executives. The two insurance companies contended that they should not have to pay under the SFG directors-and-officers policy because they determined in November 2009 that the former executives engaged in “money laundering.”
According to the 5th Circuit’s opinion, written by Senior Judge Patrick Higginbotham, the liability policy limit is $100 million. But, as noted in the opinion, a money-laundering exclusion in the policy bars coverage for loss from any claim “arising directly or indirectly as a result of or in connection with any act or acts (or alleged act or acts) of Money Laundering.”
The policy also provides that the insurance companies must pay the costs in the event that money laundering is alleged “until such time that it is determined that the alleged act or acts did in fact occur.” As the 5th Circuit reads the policy, “the determination is a judicial act” and that act must occur in a separate coverage proceeding.
The 5th Circuit modified Hittner’s injunction, affirming the order “only insofar as it provides for coverage until a court determines otherwise.” But to avoid any “awkwardness” for Hittner, who presides over the criminal case against the SFG executives, the 5th Circuit remanded the case to the Southern District so that the chief judge might assign it to another judge. Higginbotham wrote that the 5th Circuit cannot “ignore the awkwardness — readily recognized by Judge Hittner — in putting the civil ‘cart’ before the criminal ‘horse,’ especially when the judge who decides the question of coverage, with its demand for assessing the strength of the government’s criminal case, is set to later preside over the criminal trial.”
Lee Shidlofsky, attorney for the executives and a partner in Austin’s Visser Shidlofsky, writes in an e-mail, “We are pleased that the 5th Circuit concluded that Underwriters does not have the unilateral right to act as the judge and jury. Under the court’s holding, Underwriters are obligated to pay defense costs until a court determines that money laundering has in fact occurred.”
Neel Lane and Rex Heinke, attorneys representing the insurance companies and partners in Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld in San Antonio and Los Angeles, respectively, each did not return a telephone call seeking comment before press time on Thursday.
Go to Law.com for legal information and services on the web.
Sign up today for a free subscription to the Law.com daily legal newswire.
The government’s flagship health insurance programme for the rural poor has drawn increasing appreciation from European and Asian countries.
The National Health Insurance Plan for unorganized sector workers, which enables cashless treatment through use of biometric card, up to Rs 30,000, has elicited inquiries from European countries like Britain, Norway and Switzerland [ Images ] besides from Bangladesh, Nepal and Pakistan.
Planning Commission Secretary Sudha Pillai, who had introduced the Plan in 2007 when she was the Secretary of Labour Ministry, told PTI that the main inquiry from foreign governments relates to the key ingredients of the success story of the scheme without getting mired into corruption.
The Plan was incorporated in both the Railway and General Budgets this year. “It’s profoundly satisfying to see the Plan being appreciated and incorporated in both the Railway and General Budgets,” Pillai told PTI.
While in the railway budget, the Plan has been extended to all licensed porters, vendors and hawkers, the General Budget, noting the success of the scheme since its launch in April, 2008, proposed it to extend it to all Nrega beneficiaries who have worked for more than 15 days during the preceding financial year.
The Plan envisages cashless insurance cover up to Rs 30,000 including hospitalization and surgery. What sets the plan apart from other social sector welfare schemes is not only the user-friendly biometric system of smart card that can be used anywhere in the country but also that it offers a choice between public and private sector healthcare facilities.
Aiming to provide easy and quality healthcare to six crore below poverty line families, the plan has also reached 1.20 crore people and is gathering pace with each passing
year. It was only in January last year that maternity cases were included in the scheme. What also makes the scheme popular is the fact that the beneficiary pays just Rs 30 a year and the government doles out Rs 600.
How has the scheme come out triumphant when many previous social security schemes for the poor failed to deliver due to rampant corruption? It’s the use of information technology that has ensured there is no pilferage and is very helpful for migrant labourers who travel from state to state in search of work, replies Pillai.
And yet just two years ago, it was not all that easy to push the scheme through. The biggest worry was how to involve other agencies many of which were reluctant to stick their neck out.
Workers in the unorganized sector make up nearly 94 per cent of the country’s total workforce. The scheme has acted as a bulwark against one of the major reasons of indebtedness of the workers who had to fall back on moneylenders to foot their healthcare bill.
A study shows that while 23 per cent of the poor are indebted due to expenses on out-patient healthcare, on an average 52 per cent fall into debt trap due to hospitalization care, points out Pillai. Every time, a worker or his family member falls ill, he borrows money and slips into debt but Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana has helped reversed that trend, she adds.
