SOHH Over It!

Yeah Yeah Yeah…… STOP HAVING **edited for dig** KIDS !!!!

June 26, 2007 ihadnochoice

 

 The city was wrong… yadda yadda yadda. I stayed in the projects for a few years of my life and I would have been damned if my moms had more kids under our conditions at the time. But at what point to do people have to take responsibility for putting themselves in bad situations ? HOW THE FUCK ARE YOU GONNA HAVE 11 MORE KIDS AFTER….. you know what… never fucking mind…. just read.

 

12M for toxic hell

City payout to Brooklyn family largest ever in lead poisoning

 

BY NANCIE L. KATZ
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Tuesday, June 26th 2007, 4:00 AM


Scott family won $12.75 million settlement in suit alleging they were poisoned by lead in city-subsidized housing.


 

A Brooklyn family whose 19 children suffered lead poisoning while living in city-subsidized housing was awarded more than $12 million in what officials say is the largest lead-paint payoff in state history.

"We're at peace now," said Rachelle Scott, whose two children, three siblings and 14 nieces and nephews were irreversibly harmed from eating lead paint between 1981 and 1994 in city-paid housing. "We've had enough aggravation. We have lots of closure."

The stunning $12.75 million settlement - to be paid largely by the city and real estate mogul Bertram Fields - came as both sides were about to rest their cases after a two-month trial in Brooklyn Supreme Court.

The more than 20 members of the Scott family erupted in a resounding cries of "yes" when lawyer Chet Kern asked if the "terms are satisfactory."

They burst into applause after the judge wished them luck and clapped loudly for the jury, which never issued a verdict despite hearing more than 6,000 pages of testimony. Outside the courtroom, family members hugged, smiled and laughed.

"It's the largest amount ever paid by the city or the state for lead-paint poisoning," said Kern, whose firm, Jacob Fuchsberg, sued the city in 1995 on behalf of matriarch Ruby Mae Scott, now 75.

The suit charged the city with negligence, neglect and "recklessly ignoring" hazardous conditions at the decrepit Brooklyn Arms welfare hotel in Fort Greene, where eight Scott kids were exposed to lead between 1981 and 1984.

The Scotts said another 11 children were poisoned after they were born to the homeless family after the city moved them to a privately owned apartment at 58 Pulaski St. in Bedford-Stuyvesant in 1984.

"This is fair and reasonable," said Alan Kaminsky, Fields' lawyer, who had argued the Brooklyn Arms Hotel owner was innocent. Fields is paying $3 million, the city $8.25 million and the hotel's management company $1.5 million.

"This was a complex case with significant factual and legal issues," said senior city counsel Philip Rizzuto, calling the settlement "in the best interest of all parties."

Experts branded the Scott case among the city's worst. In children, lead poisoning causes learning disabilities, a reduced attention span and behavioral problems. Only one of the 19 Scott children, now ranging in age from 15 to 27, graduated from high school.

In 1981, Ruby Mae Scott moved her 11 children and year-old grandson to the Brooklyn Arms, a shelter across from the Brooklyn Academy of Music that housed 268 homeless families.

The hotel was cited for 1,300 code violations, including lead paint, before being shut down in 1989, according to testimony.

Ruby's daughters Rachelle, 37, and Judy, 39, described a hellhole of disrepair - including paint chips on walls and floors, frequent fires and huge rodents.

The city told the family the Pulaski St. apartment was lead-free, but witnesses presented hundreds of city documents attesting to lead findings and repair orders for decrepit conditions there.

Rachelle Scott said no one listened to the family's complaints. Yesterday, she was somber as her family reveled around her.

"I'm just glad it's over," she said. "It's been too long."

nkatz@nydailynews.com

 

Main Street @ 8:17 am

15 comments

  1. comment by Persia :
    June 26, 2007 @ 8:28 am

    *calls ex*
    baby- you were in fort green all the time,right? you still got that lawyers number?

  2. comment by cec :
    June 26, 2007 @ 8:37 am

    LOL

  3. comment by jaedalaurez :
    June 26, 2007 @ 8:41 am

    damn…11 kids? that basically means spending over half your life pregnant…what the hell? :blink:

  4. comment by cjp :
    June 26, 2007 @ 8:44 am

    Ok for a survey How long you think the money will last… or will they still be a "Close" family after the check is paid out…

  5. comment by cec :
    June 26, 2007 @ 8:44 am

    Yea im sorry but the 2 i have did it for me. I luv kids, good kids, but ill be damned if ima luv them THAT much..

  6. comment by cec :
    June 26, 2007 @ 8:45 am

    cjp wrote:
    Ok for a survey How long you think the money will last… or will they still be a "Close" family after the check is paid out…
    Oh i think we gon see some true greediness and selfishness.

  7. comment by cjp :
    June 26, 2007 @ 8:58 am

    I got 50 bucks that says someobody gets screwed out of this deal… An the way it always goes is…Its gonna be the person that deserves the money the most.

  8. comment by Chevy :
    June 26, 2007 @ 9:11 am

    Alright ladies. I’m taking applications for baby mommas. If you would like to fill out an application, email me your resume.

  9. comment by jaedalaurez :
    June 26, 2007 @ 9:15 am

    hahahaha- I can’t go on babymomma status after being a wife…that’s like going NBDL after being on a pro team lol.

    Less money is never a good look.

  10. comment by cec :
    June 26, 2007 @ 9:18 am

    Chevy wrote:
    Alright ladies. I’m taking applications for baby mommas. If you would like to fill out an application, email me your resume.
    Im sorry Chev, im already filling that role but i can sure check and interview possible candidates for you

  11. comment by TROJAN MAN :
    June 26, 2007 @ 9:18 am

    reparations like a muthafker

    I guess Cadillac about to sell a few more cars

  12. comment by jaedalaurez :
    June 26, 2007 @ 9:22 am

    Chevy:

    wouldn’t just adopting one of those kids from a foreign country be easier? you know, you send them 5 dollars and they send you a picture of little Prithi or Rajeeb every few months?

  13. comment by cec :
    June 26, 2007 @ 9:40 am

    jaedalaurez wrote:
    Chevy:

    wouldn’t just adopting one of those kids from a foreign country be easier? you know, you send them 5 dollars and they send you a picture of little Prithi or Rajeeb every few months

    hahahaha uhuh

  14. comment by Chevy :
    June 26, 2007 @ 9:47 am

    ‘wouldn’t just adopting one of those kids from a foreign country be easier? you know, you send them 5 dollars and they send you a picture of little Prithi or Rajeeb every few months?’

    I’d rather adopt an animal.

  15. comment by willyjsimmons :
    June 26, 2007 @ 10:06 am

    I think?

    19 kidz???

    WTF?

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

leave a comment

*
To prove that you're not a bot, enter this code
Anti-Spam Image

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <img width="" height="" src=""> <p> <q cite=""> <quote> <strike> <strong>