East Palestine train derailment settlement administrator replaced amid complaints
EAST PALESTINE, Ohio (WKBN) – A court order has terminated the appointment of a settlement administrator for those impacted by the Norfolk Southern train derailment in East Palestine.
The court order from U.S. District Court Judge Benita Y. Pearson comes after complaints and an investigation that uncovered calculation errors.
Pearson cited issues with Kroll's calculations based on a point system for settlement awards. Awards were based on proximity to the train derailment site, specific losses and other criteria.
'The Court finds sufficient reason to believe that Kroll has not fulfilled its obligation to adequately administer the Settlement and related Court Orders including, but not limited to, the Court's Order approving and implementing the Plan of Distribution,' the court order stated.
The order stated that it was believed that Kroll overpaid some class members to the detriment of others.
Epiq Class Action and Claims Solutions has been named as the replacement settlement administrator. Norfolk Southern did not object to Kroll's removal.
Meanwhile, an audit of Kroll will continue.
The settlement agreement resolves claims within a 20-mile radius of the derailment and, for those who participated, personal injury claims within a 10-mile radius of the derailment.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
SINOVAC Board of Directors Prevails Against Advantech/Prime's New York Lawsuit
New York Court Denies Advantech/Prime's Petition for Emergency Injunctive Relief Clears Legal Hurdle for Dividend Paying Agent to Payout the Special Cash Dividend of US$55.00 Per Common Share on July 7, 2025 BEIJING, June 21, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--SINOVAC Biotech Ltd. (NASDAQ: SVA) ("SINOVAC" or the "Company"), a leading provider of biopharmaceutical products in China, today announced it has prevailed against Advantech/Prime Success' ("Advantech/Prime") Petition for Emergency Injunctive Relief in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The result in the New York court represents another failure in the campaign by Advantech/Prime in coordination with Vivo Capital (together known as the "Dissenting Investor Group") to wrest control of SINOVAC from its recently installed, lawfully-elected Board of Directors (the "current SINOVAC Board") in accordance with the Privy Council order and Antiguan Law, and to interfere with the payment of the US$55.00 per common share special cash dividend declared by the current SINOVAC Board. Following the New York court's ruling, the current SINOVAC Board is free to pursue its legal action in Antigua seeking to cancel the PIPE shares invalidly issued to the Dissenting Investor Group by the former illegitimate board (the "Imposter Former Board"). If the current SINOVAC Board succeeds in legal proceedings on the PIPE shares, it has announced its intention to redistribute an additional US$11.00 per common share to SINOVAC's valid shareholders. Dr. Chiang Li, Chairman of the SINOVAC Board, commented, "We will continue our mission to restore fairness and deliver value to all valid SINOVAC shareholders, starting with paying the $55.00 per share special cash dividend as soon as July 7, 2025." The Dissenting Investor Group's self-serving, multi-pronged lawfare strategy against SINOVAC has one goal: to prevent all valid SINOVAC common shareholders from receiving any dividend payments unless the Dissenting Investor Group receives an allocation for their invalid PIPE shares, despite the fact that they have already received over US$1 billion in dividends from a SINOVAC operating subsidiary. The current SINOVAC Board has set aside in escrow the pro rata portion of dividends for the PIPE shares — funds the Dissenting Investor Group could receive if the legal proceedings they initiated rule in their favor. The current SINOVAC Board is fighting back – and winning. We feel certain that we will prevail against any further legal action by the Dissenting Investor Group and look forward to ensuring all valid shareholders receive their fair share. Your Vote is Important Your vote on or before July 8 will be about the future of SINOVAC, your receipt of your make-whole dividend payments in the near-term, and the long-term value of your investment. We urge you to keep SINOVAC's Board in place and vote on the WHITE proxy card "AGAINST" Proposal 1 to remove the current Board and "AGAINST" Proposal 2 to appoint the Reconstituted Imposter Board Slate. Your vote is critical to ensuring that SINOVAC remains on the path to stability, growth, and value creation for all shareholders. DISCARD any items you received asking you to vote for the Reconstituted Imposter Former Board Slate. If you have already voted for the Reconstituted Imposter Former Board Slate, you can subsequently revoke it by using the WHITE proxy card or WHITE voting instruction form to vote. Only your latest-dated vote will count! If you have questions about how your vote can be counted, please contact our proxy solicitor, Georgeson LLC, toll free at (844) 568-1506 in the U.S. and (646) 543-1968 outside the U.S. or via email at SinovacSpecialMeeting@ About SINOVAC Sinovac Biotech Ltd. (SINOVAC) is a China-based biopharmaceutical company that focuses on the R&D, manufacturing, and commercialization of vaccines that protect against human infectious diseases. SINOVAC's product portfolio includes vaccines against COVID-19, enterovirus 71 (EV71) infected Hand-Foot-Mouth disease (HFMD), hepatitis A, varicella, influenza, poliomyelitis, pneumococcal disease, etc. The COVID-19 vaccine, CoronaVac®, has been approved for use in more than 60 countries and regions worldwide. The hepatitis A vaccine, Healive®, passed WHO prequalification requirements in 2017. The EV71 vaccine, Inlive®, is an innovative vaccine under "Category 1 Preventative Biological Products" and commercialized in China in 2016. In 2022, SINOVAC's Sabin-strain inactivated polio vaccine (sIPV) and varicella vaccine were prequalified by the WHO. SINOVAC was the first company to be granted approval for its H1N1 influenza vaccine Panflu.1®, which has supplied the Chinese government's vaccination campaign and stockpiling program. The Company is also the only supplier of the H5N1 pandemic influenza vaccine, Panflu®, to the Chinese government stockpiling program. SINOVAC continually dedicates itself to new vaccine R&D, with more combination vaccine products in its pipeline, and constantly explores global market opportunities. SINOVAC plans to conduct more extensive and in-depth trade and cooperation with additional countries, and business and industry organizations. Important Additional Information and Where to Find It In connection with SINOVAC's Special Meeting, SINOVAC has filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") and mailed to shareholders of record entitled to vote at the Special Meeting a definitive proxy statement and other documents, including a WHITE proxy card. SHAREHOLDERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO READ THE PROXY STATEMENT AND ALL OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS WHEN FILED WITH THE SEC AND WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE BECAUSE THOSE DOCUMENTS WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION. Investors and other interested parties will be able to obtain the documents free of charge at the SEC's website, or from SINOVAC at its website: You may also obtain copies of SINOVAC's definitive proxy statement and other documents, free of charge, by contacting SINOVAC's Investor Relations Department at ir@ Safe Harbor Statement This announcement contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and as defined in the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as "may," "will," "expect," "anticipate," "aim," "estimate," "intend," "plan," "believe," "potential," "continue," "is/are likely to" or other similar expressions. Such statements are based upon current expectations and current market and operating conditions and relate to events that involve known or unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, all of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond the Company's or Board's control, which may cause actual results, performance or achievements to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. Further information regarding these and other risks, uncertainties or factors is included in the Company's filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company and Board do not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statement as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required under law. View source version on Contacts Investor and Media Contact FGS GlobalSinovac@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
The Hill
14 hours ago
- The Hill
Supreme Court won't decide whether to take up Trump's tariffs before summer recess
The Supreme Court on Friday refused two small businesses' request to announce before the court's upcoming summer recess if it will take up their challenge to President Trump's emergency tariffs. Stressing the tariffs' sweeping impacts on the economy, the businesses are asking the justices to take up their challenge now rather than let it proceed through the lower courts in normal course. The justices have yet to decide whether they will do so. But in a brief order Friday, they refused the businesses' additional ask to expedite consideration so an announcement can be made before the summer recess, now just days away. That demand for speed was aimed at having the Supreme Court hear oral arguments as soon as September in the case, which concerns whether Trump can invoke an emergency law to justify his reciprocal 'Liberation Day' tariffs and others imposed on China, Canada and Mexico. By denying the request to expedite, the justices sided with the Trump administration in the procedural fight. The administration had told the court expediting 'makes little sense' and signaled it should wait for another case challenging Trump's tariffs, which is working its way through a separate appeals court. 'Once that Federal Circuit issues its decision, this Court would likely have an opportunity to determine whether to grant certiorari — and, if so, to hear the case during the October 2025 Term. That case would be a better vehicle than this one for resolving the question presented,' Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in court filings. The non-expedited schedule provides Sauer until mid-July to file the government's court papers formally asking the justices to turn away the current case. The businesses, Learning Resources and hand2mind, and their attorneys at law firm Akin will then have up to two weeks to file a reply brief. However, the justices generally hold petitions that become fully briefed over the summer until the start of the Supreme Court's next annual term in October. The government in its opposition reminded the justices they 'could release an order granting certiorari during the summer.'
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Is Washington open to railroad mergers? This regulator isn't saying no.
For weeks, railroad executives have played footsie in public, touting the benefits of mergers that would turn regional players into coast-to-coast juggernauts. Investors, too, have caught the bug, bidding up shares of smaller carriers most likely to be acquired. But their enthusiasm hinges on one question: Will the industry's regulator be on board? Try him. Patrick Fuchs, the 37-year-old chairman of obscure and quaintly named Surface Transportation Board, has signalled what colleagues and industry players are interpreting as an openness to consolidation, or at least a clean break from the reflexive antipathy of his predecessor to deals. A focus on fact-based and impartial reviews could open the door for an industry that has long wanted to consolidate — in part to compete with Canada's transcontinental giants — but for much of the past two decades has been thwarted by Washington. 'I think it's a win,' Union Pacific CEO Jim Vena said of consolidation in an interview earlier this year. 'On the regulatory front, it's complicated.' 'I see a lot of benefit,' Norfolk Southern's chief financial officer, Jason Zampi, said in May. 'I also view the regulatory framework as pretty challenging.' Vena has privately expressed a desire to acquire either Norfolk Southern or CSX Railroad, according to people familiar with his thinking, though Union Pacific hasn't taken concrete steps to move in either direction, in part because of the uncertain odds of approval. A Union Pacific spokesperson declined to comment. Vena was also sharply criticized early in his tenure as CEO by Fuchs' predecessor, Martin Oberman, who accused Vena of pulling off 'accounting maneuvers' and headcount reductions to prop up Union Pacific's stock price at the expense of its infrastructure and maintenance (Vena has improved Union Pacific's train performance and stock price.) The STB's predecessor agency was created during the Gilded Age to regulate the burgeoning railroad industry. Today, it adjudicates disputes between railroads and their customers, service issues, and, most significantly, whether mergers can go forward or not. The last one to get the green light was in 2021, when Canadian Pacific merged with Kansas City Southern, a smaller US carrier. Fuchs' shift is subtle, and he declined to comment. But paired with the Trump administration's focus on rebuilding America's industrial might, it's rightly seen as an invitation for would-be acquirers to make their case. Promising railroad mergers and all matters a fair shake, decided on the merits and with the benefit of the president's nationalist economic agenda, could be enough to coax Vena and his peers to try. If Union Pacific were to pursue a deal, it would force the hand of the other big West Coast railroad, Warren Buffett's BNSF. To stay competitive with a beefed-up Union Pacific, it would likely need to strike a deal for whichever East Coast railroad — CSX or Norfolk Southern — Vena doesn't snag. Rail mergers are impossibly difficult even with favorable regulatory conditions. Unionized workforces, jittery customers, and reams of paperwork and filings may give pause to CEOs wary of messing with already pressured stocks. Some rail , thanks to heightened merger guidelines that require any deals to increase market competitiveness, not merely maintain it.
