09252017Headline:

Tampa, Florida

HomeFloridaTampa

Tom Young

BP Business Economic Loss Claim Appeal 2017-506:Screen Printing Company Had “Incidental” Relationship to Tourism: Tourism Designation Reversed

The following is an Appeal Panel Decision issued pursuant to Section 6 of the BP Deepwater Horizon Economic & Property Damages Settlement Agreement and the Rules Governing the BP Appeals Process. Links may have been added to assist the reader. The original decision […]

Tom Young

BP Business Economic Loss Claim Appeal 2017-504:Appeal Panel Decisions Reversing Tourism Designation for Jewelry Stores Causes Reversal of Tourism Award In This Claim

The following is an Appeal Panel Decision issued pursuant to Section 6 of the BP Deepwater Horizon Economic & Property Damages Settlement Agreement and the Rules Governing the BP Appeals Process. Links may have been added to assist the reader. The original decision […]

Tom Young

BP Business Economic Loss Claim Appeal 2017-332: Bus Company Satisfies Tourism Criteria: Not Required to Solely Cater to the Needs of Tourists

The following is an Appeal Panel Decision issued pursuant to Section 6 of the BP Deepwater Horizon Economic & Property Damages Settlement Agreement and the Rules Governing the BP Appeals Process. Links may have been added to assist the reader. The original decision […]

Tom Young

BP Business Economic Loss Claim Appeal 2017-246:Claimant’s Location Near Interstate, Without Empirical Evidence of Tourism Sales, Fails Tourism Test

The following is an Appeal Panel Decision issued pursuant to Section 6 of the BP Deepwater Horizon Economic & Property Damages Settlement Agreement and the Rules Governing the BP Appeals Process. Links may have been added to assist the reader. The original decision […]

Tom Young

BP Business Economic Loss Claim Appeal 2017-155:Parking Garage Operator In New Orleans Merits Tourism Designation

The following is an Appeal Panel Decision issued pursuant to Section 6 of the BP Deepwater Horizon Economic & Property Damages Settlement Agreement and the Rules Governing the BP Appeals Process. Links may have been added to assist the reader. The original decision […]

Tom Young

BP Business Economic Loss Claim Appeal 2017-60: Start-Up Fails Customer Mix Test

The following is an Appeal Panel Decision issued pursuant to Section 6 of the BP Deepwater Horizon Economic & Property Damages Settlement Agreement and the Rules Governing the BP Appeals Process. Links may have been added to assist the reader. The original decision […]

Tom Young

BP Business Economic Loss Claim Appeal 2016-2235:Movie Theater’s Location In Tourist Area, Without Other Proof, Not Sufficient for Tourism Designation

The following is an Appeal Panel Decision issued pursuant to Section 6 of the BP Deepwater Horizon Economic & Property Damages Settlement Agreement and the Rules Governing the BP Appeals Process. Links may have been added to assist the reader. The original decision […]

Tom Young

BP Business Economic Loss Claim Appeal 2016-2324: Movie Theater’s Location and Income Stream Do Not Merit Tourism Designation

The following is an Appeal Panel Decision issued pursuant to Section 6 of the BP Deepwater Horizon Economic & Property Damages Settlement Agreement and the Rules Governing the BP Appeals Process. Links may have been added to assist the reader. The original decision […]

Tom Young

BP Business Economic Loss Claim Appeal 2016-1787: Movie Theater Location In Tourist “Mecca” Not Sufficient for Tourism Designation

The following is an Appeal Panel Decision issued pursuant to Section 6 of the BP Deepwater Horizon Economic & Property Damages Settlement Agreement and the Rules Governing the BP Appeals Process. Links may have been added to assist the reader. The original decision […]

Tom Young

BP Business Economic Loss Claim Appeal 2016-1377:Mobile Home Dealer Denied Tourism Designation Since 60% of Its Sale Were “Local”

Claimant is a mobile home dealer with five separate locations in Alabama and Tennessee. This claim concerns Claimant’s Montgomery, Alabama location, which is located in Zone D. The Settlement Program denied this claim because Claimant is located in Zone D […]