- 77 -
For two reasons, those petitioners who prepaid will receive
refunds many times greater than the Thompsons received: Most of
those petitioners probably made payments equal to their
originally determined deficiencies, not just 80 percent thereof,
like the Thompsons, and their refunds will be exponentially
increased by interest accruals because they have had to wait much
longer than the Thompsons did to receive their refunds.
On the other hand, those petitioners who, unlike the
Thompsons, did not prepay will have deficiencies that will be
reduced in the same proportion as the Thompsons’ deficiencies
were finally reduced under the settlement. Although they will
still have to pay those reduced deficiencies with interest
accruing until mid-1992, their interest obligation will have been
substantially reduced by respondent’s concession. We conclude
these comments by again observing that these petitioners will
still be substantially better off financially than they would
have been in the absence of respondent’s misconduct. And so
should it be, in accord with the sanction the Court of Appeals
has fixed as the appropriate judicial response to the misconduct
of respondent’s attorneys.
40(...continued)
on an equal valuation scale”.
Page: Previous 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011