MovieChat Forums > The Rainmaker (1997) Discussion > A question to those who might be able to...

A question to those who might be able to answer (spoiler)

posted 13 years ago by urusai
4 replies | jump to latest

Salutations IMDb users. I pose a question to all of you in hopes that someone who frequents this board might be able to answer.

So I decided to re-watch this movie yesterday and the ending has really bothered me. Specifically, it is the fact that Great Benefit Insurance declared bankruptcy and was not able to pay the settlement to Mrs. Black. Correct me if I am wrong, but don't most (or all?) states have laws requiring insurers domiciled in a specific state to maintain solvency? In other words, according to Mrs. Black Great Benefit had over $1 billion and her $50 million award seems like a drop in the bucket. So, can insurance companies really bypass having to pay out a court awarded settlement simply by filing for bankruptcy? Additionally, I know some states (like Hawaii, for example) have guaranty associations that will help insureds by paying out claims when their insurance companies encounter financial trouble. So, wouldn't this apply to Mrs. Black or is it different when a court awards actual/punitive damages?

[–] wavetoyou 13 years ago

it's not the 50million that caused the bankruptcy, entirely. it's that Great Benefit spilled blood in the water, and the other sharks around the nation could taste the class-action law suits. They filed bankruptcy because they couldn't afford 9,000+ clients winning million-dollar law suits. At least, that's what I take from the ending.

[–] cleverfox 12 years ago

Yeah, it is fiction as mentioned by the other posters but, in the spirit of the question, yep - it was the number of class action lawsuits which tanked the company.

Whatever doesn't kill me only makes me stronger. How strong are you?

[–] Phantasm21 13 years ago

I don't know but even if they were required to keep that much capital in reserve by law Great Benefit Insurance was one of those companies that would have broken the law and probably gotten away with it. Think Bernie Madoff or Enron. They violated the law for years without regulators catching them.

Your last question makes no sense. Just because one state does something doesn't mean it has any bearing on what another state does. In any case The Rainmaker is a work of fiction so that even if all 50 states had such provisions the story could have taken place in an imaginary 51st state that doesn't.

[–] movie_fan59 13 years ago

Grisham deals with this issue in the novel by having the owners of Great Benefit be another corporation that is outside the U.S. and they wire the money out of reach of the U.S. legal system. Both the novel and the film are works of fiction and you're applying the standards of reality to them.