Judge declines to throw out lawsuit against Robert De Niro

[LeighAnn]

Source: AP via Canton Repository

A federal judge declined Monday to dismiss a lawsuit alleging Robert De Niro misrepresented his health on a movie production insurance form.

U.S. District Judge Manuel Real denied a motion by the Oscar winner asking the court to toss the suit by the Fireman’s Fund Insurance Co., which insured production on the Fox film “Hide and Seek.” De Niro’s motion called the suit “a case that should never have been filed.”

“We are still confident that we will prevail,” De Niro’s attorney Robyn Crowther said following the judge’s ruling.

Fireman’s Fund claims the actor misrepresented his health when he wrote on an insurance form that he had never been diagnosed with or treated for prostate cancer.

According to court documents, De Niro was diagnosed with prostate cancer on Oct. 15, 2003, two days after he signed the medical certificate. De Niro underwent a prostate-gland biopsy on Oct. 10, 2003.


Read more: http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?Category=20&ID=360762&r=1&subCategoryID=

[hippiechick]

1. Now this is a man I want fighting the insurance companies!

If he hadn't been officially diagnosed, they have no grounds that he "misrepresented".
Having a hunch and perhaps not feeling well isn't the same as having positive test results in hand.



We can't expect our elected officials to do shit about these insurance assclowns, lets bring in the big guns, Bronx style!! Go Git 'Em Robert!! :applause:

[Kagemusha]

4. Um yeah, actors don't self-diagnose cancer.

I can see why it should never have been filed.

[truthisfreedom]

2. Total bullshit.

Prostate cancer is such a slow-moving disease that it would never affect the making of a movie. What a crock.

[TreasonousBastard]

3. Speaking of total bullshit...

if you had bothered to read the linked article you might have noticed that there were $1.8 million in delays due to his treatment.

[Limelight]

5. Irrelevant

Unless they asked him whether he'd ever been tested for or undergone a biopsy for having prostate cancer they're out of line. There's a world of difference from being tested or biopsied to being DIAGNOSED with something.

Just another case of an insurance company proving they are nothing but scam artists, borrowing from Peter to pay Paul. They loathe paying out money and do whatever they can to deny any legitimate claim cuz the fact is no matter what the policy is, an insurance company over the entire life of the policy won't even come close to collecting the amount of money they'll have to pay out when a legit claim comes to them.

This company is pissed cuz they likely didn't make as much as they paid so they'll do whatever they have to do to keep from losing money including harassing a sick man about lying to them when in fact they simply didn't ask the correct questions.

[TreasonousBastard]

6. And you are familiar with the policy terms, as well as...

being an expert in entertainment law and coverage? Or just hate insurance companies because it's the thing to do around here?

Every policy has quite a bit of caselaw interpreting its terms, and DeNiro went for a biopsy BEFORE he signed, indicating there was a real medical question about his health. Turns out the question was pretty good one, but can it be interpreted as diagnosis or treatment.

[Trillo]

7. If corporate already knows an answer to the question

then why are they asking for the info from the human?