Source: http://slabbed.org/tag/dickie-scruggs/
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 00:40:22+00:00

Document:
……..OIG and the Mississippi Insurance Department (“MID”) have already conducted sufficient post-Katrina claims analysis to warrant reopening all Katrina files.
Them rascally “coast lawyers” are making the news again. Poor Tim, nobody spoke up for him. Then again we’ve all met crack heads with more sense.
Crumple, crumple, crumple. Whoosh into the can with you.
This began as a short update to my earlier post on the Reply filed late Friday by State Farm and a related post on the Response filed by Renfroe – both connecting to my opinion their defense of the McIntosh case was relying on psychological defense mechanisms.
I intended to offer this evidence of my contention the allegations of an affair made in the Oxford depositions suggested Freudian projection.
In court filings today, Scruggs and Scruggs Law Firm moved the court to release the security to satisfy the civil contempt charges.
In order to prevent the accumulation of any additional interest on the judgment, without waiver of the pending appeals and solely to pay the civil contempt sanction awarded in this action, Scruggs requests that the Court direct the Clerk to release to Renfroe the amount of $65,000, plus the interest having already accrued at the interest rate of 2.15% per year (as set out by this Court in the June 27, 2008 Order) from the date of the judgment until today, and release the remainder of the funds back to the Bainbridge, Mims, Rogers & Smith, LLP Trust Account.
But they are not waiving their right to appeal nor their right to recover the money if he wins on appeal.
judgment pending appeal normally does not render the case moot. These cases represent merely a particularization of the rule that issuance of a court’s mandate or obedience to its judgment does not bar timely appellate review.”); County of Dakota v. Glidden, 113 U.S. 222, 224-25 (1885) (“There can be no question that a debtor against whom a judgment for money is recovered, may pay that judgment, and bring a writ of error to reverse it, and if reversed can recover back his money.”); Ferrell v. Trailmobile, Inc., 223 F.2d 697, 698 (5th Cir. 1955) (“We think that the rule has long been established in the federal courts that payment of a judgment, of itself, does not cut off the payor’s right of appeal.”).
Since this release of the money would satisfy the contempt sanctions, I would think that the Rigsbys are off the hook from the court’s latest order on the matter.
defendants’ motions for summary judgment as a sanction.
Good job, Mr. Scruggs! Good job!
I tell you what, selling Bud really threw this country for a loop – and, as usual, the Coast was hit the hardest. Stands to reason if you figure that desire for a cold one is proportionate to the heat – inside the courtroom and out.
McIntosh has been the hot one for sometime – guess it’s all the back and forth between here and Alabama. Well, today, the “next” I’ve been looking for finally showed up on PACER. It’s the response from McIntosh to the Renfroe motion supporting State Farm’s objection to introducing out-of-state conduct – the subject of a recent post of mine.
COME NOW the Plaintiffs and respond to Renfroe’s Objections to Out of State Evidence (Document 1224).
The Plaintiffs do not intend to offer any of the specified evidence of out of state conduct as evidence against Defendant Renfroe. To the extent that any of the evidence refers to Renfroe,the Court may create safeguards including, but not limited to jury instructions, that ensure that Renfroe is not prejudiced by the reference to it.
After reading Anita Lee’s story on the upcoming deposition of the Scruggs, I pulled Notice to take Deposition of Dickie and Zach from a post Nowdy had in drafts to give SLABBED readers the rest of the story.
State Farm has been attempting since November to take the Scruggses’ pretrial testimony, called depositions, in the McIntosh case. Spokesman Fraser Engerman would say only that the company is seeking the testimony for its defense.
As Faulkner said, the past isn’t dead, it isn’t even past – and that’s certainly true in this situation.
Background information is in these posts: Dickie and Zach tell State Farm to find another party and Judge Walker serves the Rigsby sisters to State Farm on Silver Platter.
This is certainly a stalling tactic. State Farm is playing Renfroe v. Rigsby v. McIntosh v. State Farm v. Rigsbys like a merry-go-round until they can sling off. Anything but litigate these cases because they don’t have a leg to stand on obviously.
Brown v Nutt that is. Our readers may remember Maria Brown as the horny legal secretary that once worked for Scruggs Katrina Group member Nutt & McAlister. She arrived on the public scene precisely when all hell was breaking loose with the Scruggs criminal indictment telling a tale of sexual harassment in her complaint against the firm including bonus allegations regarding document handling that was used by State Farm and Renfroe in Renfroe v Rigsby.
When Nutt & McAlister lawyer Chris Shapley of the Brunini firm reminded Ms Brown that her work on Renfroe v Rigsby was confidential, she responded by reporting him to the bar and including him as a defendant in her second amended complaint. I’ll be completely honest and disclose the escalation from zero to nasty in 2.3 seconds caused me to wonder if her attorney Louis Watson Jr was mentally retarded. He certainly is no Clarence Darrow.
The amount of the bribe – small potatoes to a man with the wealth of Dickie Scruggs and, as it turned out, sweet ones at that – accounted in large part for the stunned reaction to his indictment captured in the Wall Street Journal interview with author John Grisham.
The juxtaposition of his wealth, the small amount of money involved in the bribe, and a needless crime created a picture that remained out of focus even as he was sentenced.
…the amount of the bribe, in this case, that was paid, $50,000 – – 40,000 actually delivered and $10,000 more written, transferred to Balducci to supposedly give to Judge Lackey…The Court does not feel that $50,000 is – – is a reasonable figure to use in calculating the seriousness of this crime.
The Mississippi paper furthest from the action has the best coverage today IMHO. Anita Lee once again does a stellar job and even Scruggs fatigued Sop found it fascinating and sobering reading.
And I received these letters from your friends about how sentencing would affect you and your wife and your daughter, and I have sympathy for you in that respect. Your wife, I understand, is a fine lady; and her health is very delicate. But there’ s no question that your wife and daughter are going to be better provided for in your absence than anybody else I ‘ve ever heard that has come before the Court.
Dickie Scruggs received the maximum 5 years in prison in $250,000 in fines for a crime Judge Neal D. Biggers Jr. called “reprehensible.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
in fine