-but, then again, it ain’t over ’til it’s over ; and, according to a recent status report on the tangled web of legal cases, it’s not going to be over any time soon.
When famed Oxford litigator Richard “Dickie” Scruggs, his son Zach and their legal associate Sidney Backstrom are sentenced on July 2, only part of a complicated legal drama will be resolved…
it’s tough to make predictions, particularly about the future – but the prediction there’s more to come is as certain as the sun coming up in the morning. In fact, it appears State Farm filed a Response to the Scrugges recent Motion shortly after sunrise today.
Obviously, they’re having a little trouble grasping the concept of Scruggses as non-parties; but, that they are. Notheless, State Farm drags up rulings Judge Walker made when the Scrugges were parties in McIntosh v State Farm as the centerpiece of the kiss-up-to-the-judge strategy that shapes their response.
State Farm respectfully submits this response in opposition to the Scruggses’ objections (Doc. 1201) to Magistrate Judge Walker’s May 15, 2008 Order (Doc. 1194) compelling the production of certain documents. These objections follow in the wake of the Scruggses’ earlier objections to Judge Walker’s December 11, 2007 Order (Doc. 911) that denied a motion to quash their depositions, in response to which this Court issued its January 9, 2008 Order (Doc. 988), allowing their depositions to go forward following the resolution of the document issues by Judge Walker. On January 9, 2008, Judge Walker also issued an Order (Doc. 989) setting forth a process for the resolution of those issues, which were then robustly addressed by all interested persons and carefully decided by Judge Walker…
…Time and again, the Scrugges merely, but impermissibly, advance arguments that invite this Court to second guess Judge Walker’s carefully considered and carefully drawn ruling.
In addition to State Farm’s Response, today’s early bird special also includes a letter to the Court from Renfroe attorney Hunter Twiford – a to-do list for Judge Walker, so to speak, including prompts for Walker to give Judge Senter a reminder about two previous motions submitted in Limine!
- Renfroe’s Motion in Limine to exclude Exhibit “C” with Memorandum of Support
Any valid points made by either State Farm or Renfroe aside, there’s just no other way to spin the Response and Letter filed today: they want the Court to make Scruggs give them what they’ve asked for – admissible or not – and the McIntosh family in court without the admissible evidence and witness needed to prove their case, not just without the Rigsby sisters.
However, you can bet your last nickel that some will try to put a what-is-Scruggs-hiding spin on it. Of course, a nickel’s not worth a dime any more – and the future ain’t what it use to be for Richard “Dickie” Scruggs even if it ain’t over ’til it’s over.