Tag: Alabama Rigsby-Scruggs Civil Contempt

While Senter’s Qui Tam Burns, Acker, Renfroe & State Farm Churn

We have a new Renfroe v Rigsby page that we are still updating with docs as they have come out from under seal. Belle & Nowdy have literally spent hours pouring through them helping make me look good to our readers. The ladies are simply heaven sent gifts to the slabbed.

This post will be long out of necessity. As Nowdy posted yesterday even his worship, Judge Acker pointed out Renfroe V Rigsby and Ex Rel Rigsby were joined at the hip. To get our readers up to speed we start by linking a New York Times News story from January 2007 on the proposed settlement between SKG and State Farm that Judge Senter ultimately rejected:

To close the deal, State Farm wants the approval of Mississippi’s attorney general, Jim Hood, and the state’s insurance regulator, George Dale, lawyers close to the talks said. As a condition of the deal, these lawyers said, Mr. Hood would be required to drop a criminal investigation into State Farm’s handling of claims as well as a civil lawsuit against State Farm and other insurers. Continue reading “While Senter’s Qui Tam Burns, Acker, Renfroe & State Farm Churn”

They were late, they were late for a very important date – the Mad Hatter thinking of Judge Acker

The Louis Carrol version of the Mad Hatter said if you don’t know where you’re going, any road will take you there.

In the wonderland of Alabama’s federal courts, Judge William Acker has been mad-as-a-hatter since the dismissal of his criminal concept charge against Mississippi attorney Dickie Scruggs -so mad, in fact, he took the first road he could find to charge Scruggs will civil contempt.

The motion of defendants, Cori Rigsby and Kerri Rigsby (“Rigsbys”),for summary judgment for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is DENIED.

Retaining jurisdiction made it possible for Acker to make his move.

the court finds that the Rigsbys, and non-parties, Richard Scruggs and The Scruggs Law Firm, P.A. (“Scruggs”), are guilty of civil contempt by virtue of their untimely or incomplete compliance with the preliminary injunction entered on December 8, 2006. Continue reading “They were late, they were late for a very important date – the Mad Hatter thinking of Judge Acker”