Is this what Judge Senter had in mind?
When Judge Senter issued his order disqualifying the Katrina(less) Litigation Group, was this letter from Don Barrett on behalf of the KLG what he had in mind? Where the Katrina Litigation Group handpicks a successor and sends clients a contract to sign up with that firm?
Here's the key part of Judge Senter's order:
The payments made to the Rigsby sisters require the disqualification of the successors to the SKG and those whom they have added as associates from further participation in any litigation in this Court against State Farm and Renfroe arising from property damage attributable to Hurricane Katrina.
Here's a link to the new firm Barrett recommends, including language welcoming the new Katrina clients. And here is a link to a story about the new firm being sued over attorney fees in tobacco litigation. Sound familiar?
I'd be pretty happy if I were on of the plaintiffs that were originally signed with SKG, then watched as Scruggs gets indicted and pleads guilty to bribery charges, get switched to the KLG, watch as they get booted off of the case due to alleged ethical problems they did, then they recommend me to a law firm two states away to handle my case. On top of that, they give my name and other information to this firm so I'll be getting solicitation information from them. No thanks, I think I would probably do better going at it pro se... sure couldn't do any worse then my lawyers have done so far for me.
Well, let me in here for a word or two because it's really exciting that Mr. Umphrey, who gave about 20 million to my former alma mater, Baylor University, and ran off with enough money to sink half the coast of Northern Ireland, is showing up in the new Dixie Mafia. He's legend.
I should know this scheme well - it's part of the grand tradition of catching the devil beating his wife. Thunder and rain. Gods of the past everywhere popping up. What teamwork!
As it is known to some, Texas, Mississippi, and Florida is where the big money went, and most of it landed in Dickie's pockets. Some of the first load of dough put the figure for Scruggs at around 870 million.
Of course, the Umphrey firm, which as I once said to The Baylor Lariat, ate out of the same hand that fed the Mississippi lawyers. They joined the born agains, and that's Mr. Barrett's band of boys.
When Barrett, who stole the Brown and Williamson documents, and circulated them as "Mr.Butts", he opened the door to what I call reverse discovery, and that is what happened in the Rigsby moments of glory. He passed along the good stuff to another born again - here's Umphrey's. While he didn't do anything to help the dying smoker's, he damn sure shot them, and gave a pinch of his gold to Baylor Law. By the grace of god and Nancy Drew!
Granted, I've got to say Baylor was a lousy undergraduate school, but Umphrey and his trim boy friends in two other firms, not to mention the Attorney General Morales (who had a fling with his pay off from the Texas boys and that spilled over into a lot of territories), really did nothing but piggy-back on the massive mother load of you're-my-bitch lawyering in the headquarters at Scruggs' place.
I can't help but laugh at the absurdity of the fatcat born again mother-load from Baylor Law getting some again - and it's youre my bitch all over again!
Rap on that - Barrett, born again, and Umphrey's born again going in the same direction and feeding out of the same water hole.
Baylor Law got a new law library from the "hole in the gang" vangard in Mississippi. Rap on that because it's sure you're my bitch reprised.
So Barrett's going in the same direction again? Can Dickie be far behind? And, most of all, Mike Moore? It's all in the family. It's another case of trading apples for oranges and getting the same result. But Umphrey's got god on his side.
Is there any truth in law at all? I should say "Good god!" but it's so down right mythical, I want to ante up with a scream toward the pathenon [parthenon] down toward the Acropolis! At least the Greeks aren't zealously trying to play muffy catch the ball as if everybody's senile. Is there no idealism left? Is Barrett brainstorming or is the community of law dumb as Texas rocks?
I hope the buds from Texas get out on Mardi Gras. This is the Emperor in Mardi Gras faux clothes. Someone? A judge out there? We're fools? I should think so. Nobody has a memory?
This isn't just symbiotic. It's incestuous!
The address for the Nashville Provost-Umphrey office is the same as that on Barrett Law Office letterhead for the Nashville office. Remarkable.
I would think that the plaintiffs would be happy to find a lawyer willing to take their cases, many of which are probably very weak. KLG may have some ethical duties to help them find another lawyer which perhaps could have been better satisfied by merely suggesting a few names. If KLG is getting some sort of referral fee then that is another matter.........
Interesting thought IAT. Would it be legal and ethical for Don Barrett to accept a referral fee from Umphrey after being DQ'd?
Do you think Provost-Umphrey will rent Dickie's old office? Love the fact Don negoiated the same fees with P-U for his former clients. Does KLG have any rights to leins from their former clients?
Mr.Rossmiller:
So you said, to vet posts is a prophalactin from spam and some things you simply can't find for the life of you - so you said.
[That's why journalism has the final choice to wag it or nag it - or dump it. It's perfect. And it's the way things work so take it or not take it.]
But just between the two of us and the walls, isn't is obvious to all who know the tobacco litigation that Umprhrey's firm was lead counsel for Texas' "cut" of the third tobacco settlement? That would be Texas. Texas followed Mississippi - with Umphrey's "proof" coming from Mississippi. So where's the shy retreat from the logic of presumptive "ear-wigging".
Judge Senter's intent is still the presumptive fact - disqualification, not a piggy-back ride, not a reward.
There's no ignorance in not knowing the facts of the past, it's just too hard to be right. It must be hell to be a law firm blog because a little knowledge has to be screened for dangerous thinking - especially where so many conflicts exist to thwart the effort of truth.
Mr. Rossmiller, as in your selectivity, and your acceptable posts, surely you don't object to posting a fact that the suspicious arrangement of Barrett, who did indeed run the "Butt's" operation during the blitz in the Mississippi-Texas-Florida pre-Arbitration 3-member panel, and work in concert with the Mississippi group, using their tactics and and information, is tethered to the interests which won Scruggs a trilogy of victory's amounting to over 870 million dollars.
Barrett got his share from Texas under the same Umphrey-lead Texas boys. Is the fact of the new alignment so vague as to appear like a tumbleweed rather than a coiled rattle-snake? A hand-shake deal?
Surely, one might know this. Or if not, post a knowledged source dealing with a probable sneaky hand-shake over Judge Senter's intention not to use a trundle bed under the guise of covering up the big bed where the Katrina Group was sleeping - and disqualified.
It's not unorthodox that lack-of-knowledge consumes all blogs, and this pattern is not totally independent of the classic meaning of reason which is hubris.
So, read the history of the tobacco litigation and Senter's decision fits the totality of sanctions - no, Mr.Barrett, you can't fence your job to your brothers in Texas and keep the Order of the Court. Or it would seem so. Same time, another year.
Why would Barrett gather up his past leading hand-out firm in Texas, if not for personal reason? Imagine a hand-shake deal at the very least? It is a Billy Budd scene -it's a question of law. Senter's Order was not to dangle a thin scull kill, but put on a hanging.
Mr.Rossmiller, do you find that this "transfer" is unsubstantial or inconsequential to the merits of the Katrina disqualification of Barrett (who is Scruggs, Moore, et. al.)?
I can't imagine that leaving out the fact of the Mississippi liason with the Texas tobacco settlement is fully understood, or that we don't know how to follow the roadmap on the Umphrey arrangement - and certainly, isn't it a bit obvious that Barrett's not the guy who gets in the same bed with the Texas clan? What's the notion on a probable hand-shake, and how is this NOT a by-product of seductive deception of the Court's ruling?
What's the value of a Court Order if the path of the obstruction of the meaning of the order is fully understood, but is
totally violative of the conditional fact, wrong-doing, and that's what Judge Senter apparently intended NOT to reward.
It's obviously not simply the paltry defense of unawareness of the law or the perception or appearance of the meaning of Senter's Order to disqualify, but a total disinterest in knowing - or not wanting to know - the connection of the Umphrey and Barrett, et.al. And it's not about vetting a blog.
I'm saying the research out there isn't very constructive to the end of knowing how to send the wagon to circle in the Texas firm which is not just suspicious, but disgusting.
Judge's call, he made it, and Umphrey plus the Katrina group is about as close to legal incest as one can get. [Missing something? Order spam.]
Probably has a lien under Mississippi law for quantum meriut (sp).