Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Fragile Mideast Peace Awaits Peacekeeping Force; Judge's Ruling Widens Insurance Coverage for Katrina Victims, According to Trial Lawyer
Aired August 16, 2006 - 08:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR, AMERICAN MORNING: Welcome back to the program. I'm Miles O'Brien.
CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR, AMERICAN MORNING: And I'm Carol Costello in for Soledad.
Here's a look at what's happening this morning, the fragile ceasefire in the Middle East is holding, and now diplomats from France and other countries are in Beirut working out the details of that international peacekeeping force.
In central Baghdad, another car bombing; at least nine killed, 20 others wounded it happened in a street market just before midday local time.
Doctors at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester Minnesota are looking over President Gerald Ford this morning. His office says he was admitted for tests, but offers no further details. Mr. Ford, who is 93, has made four trips to the hospital this year.
O'BRIEN: Later this morning, New York City will release about 1,600 newly discovered recordings of emergency phone calls made on 9/11. They consist most of internal calls between fire departments and EMS dispatchers.
And a state of emergency in Wyoming, the wind-wiped Casper Mountain wildfire spread to about 7,000 acres this morning. So far, police evacuated about 200 homes.
Chad Myers, at the Weather Center, with more on whether they have any relief in sight, but he's beginning, of course, on the East Coast.
(WEATHER REPORT)
COSTELLO: We've been talking a lot about this, this morning, now we go in depth. As far as the insurance companies are concerned, it's wind versus water, when it comes to settling claims. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina we told you about families who thought if the wind brought a storm surge and flooded their homes, they'd be covered. Well, they were wrong. So they sued.
This morning, a verdict, and a confusing one at that. Richard "Dickie" Scruggs, is a trial attorney, his firm represented Paul and Julie Leonard in this latest case and will represent some 3,000 other policyholders in the Gulf Coast.
Welcome.
RICHARD "DICKIE" SCRUGGS, TRIAL ATTORNEY: Thank you, Carol. Thanks for having me on.
COSTELLO: Let me get this straight. The court ruled an insurance company doesn't have to cover damage from a storm surge. Many of your clients are simply out of luck. So why are you claiming victory?
SCRUGGS: The court ruled that if there's wind damage, they have to cover wind damage. The companies, up until yesterday, Carol, have been taking the position that if there's any water damage, they don't even haven't to pay for wind damage, even if the wind is what blew your roof off. They can't take that position any longer. This is a great victory.
COSTELLO: That's like fine tuning things, right? A great victory because, you say, before there was water at all in the house and the wind damaged something, the insurance companies wouldn't have to pay.
Let's take a look at the Leonard case because they lost their home. They were suing for $130,000, and they received what? A little more than 1,200 bucks to pay for the roof, that the wind blew off the house. Frankly, I would not be a happy camper in this case.
SCRUGGS: Carol, the insurance companies are the ones who are not happy campers because they're going to have to pay for wind damage. The Leonards did not lose their roof -- that's a miscalculation here. They actually had mostly surge damage in their house, and that's why they only got $1,200.
COSTELLO: Well, so --
SCRUGGS: Most of the cases, though -- most of the cases, Carol, are cases that, of extreme wind damage, where the wind did most of the damage long before the water got there.
COSTELLO: Yes, but don't homeowners have to prove what the wind damaged and what the water damaged, and isn't that why this, why the Leonards only got $1,200? How do they prove what the wind damaged and what the water damaged?
SCRUGGS: The judge ruled yesterday, Carol, that the insurance company has the burden of proving that water did the damage. And all of the signs show that the wind came well ahead of the water. So homes like the one, where I'm standing now, that are completely gone, there's nothing left at all, have a real good chance now of getting recovery.
Up until now, the companies were taking the position that any water in your house thwarted your wind damage. That's now down the drain. COSTELLO: Well, the insurance companies don't see it that way and I want to read you a quote from Nationwide. It says, "This ruling underscores just how important it is for all policyholders to carefully read and understand the terms of the coverage they purchase." So they say, these people didn't understand their policy. You're representing them, and you're kind of giving them false hope.
SCRUGGS: Well, we're not giving them false hope. The judge gave them a lot of hope yesterday. And it's going to help thousands of Gulf Coast families in their claims against insurance companies. There's an awful lot here that perhaps doesn't immediately meet the eye in this decision.
COSTELLO: Tell me about that, because I'm still wrapping my mind around the Leonards only getting $1,200 when they say there's $130,000 worth of damage to their home?
SCRUGGS: Most of the damage to their home was from storm surge, Carol. It wasn't from wind. That's why they didn't get very much money. Most of the homeowners, particularly the ones that are coming up for trial now, have lost their entire homes, like the place where we're standing now.
You know, those are the ones that are now going to have a fighting chance to win, because up until this point, the insurance company was saying, if you had any water, we're not even going to pay you for wind damage. And if you had one inch of water in your house, even if the rest of it blew down, we dent pay. Now they can't do that. That's what is so significant about this decision right now.
COSTELLO: OK. So, maybe the Leonards aren't big winners, but future clients will be, especially, if they're homes are, let's say, in sticks on the ground?
SCRUGGS: That's correct. I would have preferred to have gotten more money for the Leonards, and for that family, but the case is really all about policy coverage and policy interpretation, and we won those in a very big way.
COSTELLO: All right. Thank you for joining us this morning.
SCRUGGS: Thank you.
COSTELLO: Trial Attorney Richard "Dickie" Scruggs -- Miles.
O'BRIEN: The Brits cracked that airliner bomb scheme because they had a mole. An agent able to infiltrate the group. Finding people with the cultural and linguistic credentials to do that in the U.S. is a top priority for intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Kareem Wynter takes us inside to effort to root out the inside information.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KAREEM WYNTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT, (voice over): He's a 20-year- old California college senior, who dreams of a future in journalism. Right now, Zabie Monsoory, has a more critical focus, helping the FBI nab terrorists.
ZABIE MONSOORY, STUDENT HELPING FBI: We don't want to spy on our own people, but if we see anything suspicious, we'd be more than happy to tell law enforcement.
WYNTER: Inside information that could help authorities penetrate the Muslim community, and stop potential attacks. Just like the alleged plan to use explosives to blow up British flights to the U.S. Investigators say it was a tip from Britain's Muslim community that helped them foil that plot, before it ever got off the ground.
MONSOORY: We live in this community. We go to these mosques, and if there's any extremists, we would be the first one to notice it. So it is important for law enforcement, they want partnership. If we as Muslims youth, as Muslims in general, see anything, for us, we can go tell the law enforcement firsthand.
WYNTER: Federal agencies and local authorities turn to Muslim leaders with a powerful outreach program.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I gave my -- the FBI contact your phone number in case --
WYNTER: Trying to generate tips.
J. STEPHEN TIDWELL, ASST. DIR., IN CHARGE OF FBI: It is not uncommon that it's going to be someone in the community that notices something or someone, and says that does not fit, that causes me concern. Then we ask them to bring it forward.
It could very well be nothing, but in our new world of having to cover every counterterrorism lead, and run it all the way out to make sure it's not a dot, then we need people's help.
WYNTER: Monsoory says, as a Muslim youth outreach coordinator, that partnership starts with dialogue and education. A gradual buildup of trust between Muslims and Arab-Americans and the government that's kept them under the microscope this 9/11.
(On camera): Are you concerned, though, you may be seen as a traitor by your own people?
MONSOORY: I think there's a small minority who thinks working with government as being a sellout.
WYNTER (voice over): Monsoory says it's a minor sacrifice he's willing to make in the global fight against terrorism. Kareen Wynter, CNN, Los Angeles.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
O'BRIEN: Still to come, NBA star Stephen Marbury, he'll be here, in the house, live.
COSTELLO: I think he's here now.
O'BRIEN: He's a man with soul, in more ways than one. He's put his name on a new line of sneakers, and we'll tell you about the buzz on this one. It's about the cost. And it's not what you think.
COSTELLO: Nope. He'll tell us why that's important, and it is important. Plus, AOL goes on a treasure hunt. Find out why the company wants to dig for gold outside of a house in Massachusetts on this AMERICAN MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O'BRIEN: Now the high price of high tops. If you're a parent, you are all too familiar with this.
Check out the cost of some fancy sneakers here. The price for Nike Air Jordan brand, $95 to $175. The Air Jordan, $175, the top end. The price of Nike LeBron James, Signature Shoes, $79 to $349 -- $349 for sneakers! Top selling Nike Zoom LeBron III, is $125. Price for Reebok Allen Iverson Signature Shoes, $55 to $90. Allen Iverson, top selling one, is the Reebok Iverson, Answer 9, $90. Ouch!
Now there's a new shoe, and I guess you could say it is out of step with the competition. Thankfully. I'm wearing them now. They are Starburys. Like them? $14.98, guy, and gals, and kids. New York Knicks Star Stephon Marbury joins us now.
This is a different price point.
STEPHON MARBURY, NEW YORK KNICKS: Yes it is.
O'BRIEN: Good to have you with us. Why? Why do a $14.98 sneaker?
MARBURY: I think what we're doing is putting new life into the communities and the inner cities, we're allowing kids to go out, and be able to buy these shoes on their own. They're not going out and basically saying you know, I want to spend my money on a $200 pair of shoes. Now they can go out and buy five or six pair of shoes at one time.
O'BRIEN: This has been a long-running discussion, and debate over this. Whether it's responsible for companies to be selling shoes at this level of price.
Bill Cosby's talked a lot about this over the years. I want to share with folks, a quote from just a couple years ago. He says a lot of provocative things. Bt listen to this: "These people are not parenting," referring to the parents who buy them. "They're buying things for their kids, $500 sneakers, for what? And won't spend $200 for "Hooked On Phonics?" They're standing on the corner and they can't speak English." That's what he said back in 2004. You go along with that?
MARBURY: I agree with it to an extent. I think knowing is half the battle and I think a lot people just aren't informed. They now know what we're doing is we're informing people. We're allowing people to understand, you know, that you don't have to pay that much for sneakers. And I think people are really having a great following behind it.
O'BRIEN: Is there anything wrong, though, with producing making, selling, a $300 or $150 sneaker?
MARBURY: That's not for me to say. But what I can say, what we're doing is, we're doing something that is revolutionary and it's a movement. And we're trying to basically change how everything is being perceived as far as sneakers.
O'BRIEN: You know, what this does say, it that there is an awful lot of profit margin in these other sneakers. This shoe, you know, looks -- I assume the quality is in the neighborhood. One question I might ask is, are you cutting corners at the production end? That's a sensitive issue?
MARBURY: Not at all. This shoe right here, if you take this shoe and you took a shoe that was $200; if you took both of the shoes and you took a sword, and cut both of them down the middle, the shoes would do the same thing.
O'BRIEN: Yeah. So you're going to wear that --
MARBURY: I'm wearing this shoe, right here.
O'BRIEN: very shoe on the court for the Knicks?
MARBURY: This shoe right here, I'm going to wear in a color way, where it will be orange, and then on some of it will be blue. You know, where as this part right here may be blue. It's going about to different style.
O'BRIEN: It's not like a stock car driver, who is not really driving a Buick? You know?
MARBURY: No, no. I'm going to get busy in these. These right here, I'm going to get busy in them.
O'BRIEN: All right. So, I guess you're making an important point here. And you've involved Boys & Girls Clubs in the design. Is this some kind of breakthrough do you think? Is this going to change the way --
MARBURY: I think what we're doing, like I said, is revolutionary and we're trying to basically change the way how everyone feels about sneakers. It's definitely something that's breakthrough.
O'BRIEN: Let me ask you this, though, is part of the appeal, of these sneakers, that they're $200, or $300? And if it's $14.98, is this going to be cool to wear?
MARBURY: I'm wearing them.
O'BRIEN: Therefore, it's cool. MARBURY: Exactly. I think for myself the way how, everyone is perceiving the sneakers is that, if the shoe -- does the shoe have the same makeup as a shoe that would be $200, and it is. You know what I'm saying. It's proven. People can do it for themselves. They could go test it for themselves.
O'BRIEN: What do you feel -- how do you feel about that level of profit? $200, $300 shoes? Is that irresponsible?
MARBURY: I just feel you don't have to do that. Why do that when you can do this?
O'BRIEN: Stephon Marbury, who will be wearing those, in different colors. I'm told there are five colors. If you want to check them out, there are certain lines that are carrying them. Starbury.com is the easiest place to go.
MARBURY: Definitely.
O'BRIEN: You can go to Starbury.com. There are some other things that are more -- at the lower end the price point. And I think a lot of parents are breathing a sigh of relief.
MARBURY: The best thing. We've got other thing, too. Clothes, too. We got a lifestyle.
O'BRIEN: All right. A whole lifestyle, there.
MARBURY: A whole lifestyle.
O'BRIEN: Affordable.
MARBURY: Affordable.
O'BRIEN: Thanks for dropping by. Good to see you.
MARBURY: Thanks for having me.
O'BRIEN: Good to meet you.
MARBURY: All right.
O'BRIEN: Good luck on the court.
MARBURY: Appreciate it.
Up next, we're going to be "Minding Your Business." The business of sneakers, after a break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BUSINESS HEADLINES)
(NEWSBREAK)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
