Well, if the strength of a motion is measured by the lack of substantive comment in the blogosphere, it’s worth the effort the two Missouri firms made to print their Motion to Reconsider on Kevlar – along with a Memorandum of Support and five exhibits: Exhibit 1: Cases Settled by State Farm and Exhibits 2-5: Declarations from Robinson, Winter, Dewitt and Graves.
A fair examination of the Motion filed by the two Missouri firms begins with the basis for their disqualification in Judge Senter’s order.
In light of the current attorneys’ having acquired, during the course of their joint representation of the Rigsby sisters, actual knowledge of the financial arrangement among their co-counsel, Scruggs, and the Rigsby sisters and constructive knowledge that the arrangement was improper, I find that the current attorneys should be disqualified from further participation as counsel in this action.
The two firms take these findings head-on in their request for reconsideration and provide facts to the contrary in both the supporting memorandum and the exhibits. Exhibit 2, the related declaration of Chip Robertson made to correct inaccurate factual assumptions made by the Court in reaching its decision to disqualify Relator’s counsel provides a case in point. Continue reading “Printed on Kevlar – Motion to Reconsider filed by Relator’s attorneys offers fact to counter assumptions underlying their disqualification UPDATED”