Just in time for the Fourth of July celebration of our nation’s freedom from tyrany, none of the the mad hatter of Justice in Alabama issues an Opinion-Order more telling of his capacity to serve justice than anything that could be written about him.
The Opinion-Order addressed the motions filed by the Rigsby sisters and non-party Dick Scruggs asking for guidance on the release of documents under the preliminary Injunction prohibiting the release of same on December 8, 2006 and the related Objections filed by Renfroe- the so called “data dump” documents.
In all fairness to Judge Acker, this part he got right.
This court has no intent or valid reason to interfere with the operation of litigation proceeding in any other court, and…
A little late to figure that out – hence, no doubt, a confession of sorts follows.
…if there were such a reason, the passage of time has lessened, if not eliminated, any need to preclude disclosure in other cases of information obtained by the Rigsbys during their “data dump” or other acquisitions of materials subject to this court’s injunction of December 8, 2006.
In other words, he’s held onto them long enough to do as much damage as possible to the Qui Tam claim and Scruggs – and now for the punch line.
Therefore, the court goes beyond the requests made in the motions of Cori Rigsby and Scruggs, and hereby ORDERS that Cori Rigsby, Scruggs, any and all witnesses,deponents, and entities subject to discovery requests in litigation now pending or to be filed in any other court are RELIEVED from any obligation imposed by this court not to disclose information, even though the materials being disclosed may be within the description contained in the injunction of December 8, 2006.
To the extent not thus granted, this order renders MOOT the motions by Cori Rigsby and Scruggs, as well as the objections to the motions presented by Renfroe.
Renfroe’s motion to allow State Farm access to the materials covered by the injunction is well taken, and is GRANTED. Unless former counsel for the Rigsbys are willing to deliver their protected copies of the documents to State Farm, State Farm is hereby ALLOWED to make copies of the documents now held by counsel for Renfroe, but shall not make them available to the general public.
Why hold back? Wallpaper the world with the evidence and let the court of public opinion rule.
I agree with the Judge…let’s see what they are still holding that they have ALREADY SIGNED SWORN AFFIDAVITS TO saying everything was turned in. I think we will see one more time that all of these individuals have their own way of following the law and the direction of the court. I know, I know, slabbies think you shouldnt have to follow the law when it goes against you and for the insurance industry but darn, aint it a shame we live in a country ruled by laws and not men with money as was in olden times?
The documents the Rigsby sisters are fighting over Mr CalStan have all been turned in when Cori Rigsby turned in her dead computer.
I’m a little confused on all of this so maybe someone can clarify my questions. I had heard or read that that this computer crashed in the summer of 2007 sometime, which was 6-9 months after Ackers original order and after the Rigsby’s did the affidavits saying they didn’t have anything subject to the order. I also thought that the only reason they “turned in’ their computer is that the other side may have subpoened it and they said that a couple months before the subpoena it had crashed. After it was turned in, a computer expert was able to pull these documents off of the hard drive, so it appears that these were in the possession of the Rigsby’s after the affidavit for Acker’s order, and before it crashed. I’ve read so much on this stuff I’m not sure all this is correct, but if it is, I would be pretty worried if I were the Rigsby’s as Acker could come after them for the criminal contempt similiar to what he did to Scruggs (the one that was thrown out-criminal one vs the civil one)
CalStan, contrary to your claim, our position is everyone – including Judge Acker – should follow the law. It would be a waste of time to argue with you; so, I’ll just state our position and let you continue your fantasy undisturbed.
Beau, a review of Judge Ackers orders and opinions should resolve any genuine confusion on your part.
Beau this is what Judge Walker wrote in an order last month and then I’ll give you my understanding:
Not exactly Nowdy. Judge Acker release of the sisters but doesn’t deal with the issue of consequences if they held back documents. To this point I’m assuming Acker is viewing the 76 page doc Walker referenced as an oversight. Like I said in my reply to Beau if there is more Acker may go nuclear and he’ll have a good reason.
The lawyering is what has me scratching my head.
sop
Does this mean Acker is letting everyone see the Renfroe “trade secrets” or is he just releasing the broken computer data.
All of it duesouth – but only to State Farm – a point that no one seems to consider as the basis for my opinion of Acker’s Opinion-Order although clearly stated as the conclusion.
Surely, I’m not the only one that finds that offensive. Given the number of cases still active against State Farm, including the qui tam, it’s just incredible he would do that.
I think I see it, Nowdy. I find it very offensive that once again Acker has stretched his jurisdiction over another non-party to the case before him and allowed that party access to files that were there for them not to see.
I believe the issue over the document is that if Cori and Walker give it to State Farm then that would violate the protective order where State Farm was not entitled to see said documents. But now Acker has inserted himself into Mississippi courts by allowing State Farm to see documents that he kept solely for the use of parties in his suit. What right does he have to give documents to State Farm?
I think Walker assumed they may be in violation of Acker preliminary injunction by having that one document. I don’t think Acker saw it that way. If he did, he surely would have said so.
How does it help Renfroe in their case against the Rigsbys for State Farm to have access to the documents is my question and why?
From Renfroe’s Motion to Amend Protective Order and Enforce Injunction
Not just a qui tam, belle, but a lot of other State Farm policy holder cases.
Look who’s mind the store at ex rel Rigsbys — nobody:
U.S. District Court
Southern District of Mississippi (Southern)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:06-cv-00433-LTS-RHW
Plaintiff
Cori Rigsby
(United States of America Ex Rel) represented by Cori Rigsby
PRO SE
Plaintiff
Kerri Rigsby
(United States of America Ex Rel) represented by Kerri Rigsby
PRO SE
duesouth, that is pretty funny about the “trade secrets.” Now everyone can have access to them. Maybe this will help the Rigsbys in their suit against Renfroe. Maybe now they’ll do a counter-suit claiming that Renfroe’s suit against them was capricious in that it was only filed so that State Farm could get their hands on those documents without going through discovery.
I know one of the judges (hard to keep them all straight these days) gave the policyholders something like 45 days to find new counsel after one of the disqualifications, or make the decision to proceed pro se. Was there anything along those lines (time restriction) on the ex rel Rigsby case also. As BS puts up above the record shows “pro se”, which I am guessing that the sisters, or an attorney assisting them actually filed in the case. Or would that be an automatic onec the counsel of record was DQ’ed?
Beau, right now they are without representation. They do have time to find new attorneys. I forget how much time at the moment. The US Attorney (Dunn Lampton)has not signed off or on for the case as of now. I am hoping the Missouri lawyers will file a writ of mandamus to the 5th Circuit Court to try to get back on. But as of now, it is automatic that their attorneys have all been terminated.
CalStan, You are right on target!!