Kent was awarded over $27 million after he sued United of Omaha Life Insurance Co. of Nebraska according to Forbes. The money was for “being wrongly imprisoned, lost income and punitive damages.” Here is a brief synopsis of his case:
“Kent was convicted as the result of two checks delivered by United Parcel Service (UPS) in 1991. He was negotiating a health insurance plan with United of Omaha on behalf of the Independent Community Bankers, a group of non-chain banks.
The plan never was finalized even though Kent received money while he oversaw the policy, processing premiums and claims.
The checks, totaling more than $330,000, were made out to ICB from United of Omaha. Endorsing checks made out to ICB and placing the money in accounts without a proper agreement in place resulted in the mail fraud convictions.
Kent eventually repaid the money.
The mail fraud law at the time only applied to items sent through the U.S. Postal Service, not UPS. United of Omaha had documents showing the checks were sent by UPS, but Kent's lawyer never requested those documents - something the judge said the attorney should have done.
Kent lost his insurance license and spent two years in federal prison after being found guilty of two counts of mail fraud. A judge later overturned the convictions after concluding Kent's lawyer was ineffective.
Kent sued United of Omaha, claiming it should have provided certain evidence pertaining to the case when he was sentenced, but his lawyer at the time never requested the documents.”
Kent actually committed the crime but the mail fraud law didn’t apply to UPS, so that’s why he was released after two years in prison. However, the insurer had nothing to do with his imprisonment or bungling lawyer so why should they pay any money to Kent? Makes sense to me. It goes without saying that Kent should have never committed mail fraud.
