Scruggs sues firm that demanded money from him for defense of Rigbys
Two questions.
Number 1.
Q: How close is this whole Rigsby mess to unraveling, like a crow swooping down, grabbing a loose thread on your suit and flying off?
A: Apparently, pretty close.
Number 2.
Q: When is an agreement to indemnify someone's expense not an agreement to indemnify someone's expenses?
A: Apparently, when Dickie Scruggs is involved.
Take a look at this new lawsuit filed by Scruggs against one of the law firms that had been defending the Rigsby sisters, Kerri and Cori, in the Renfroe v. Rigsby case in federal court in Alabama. Scruggs is suing for declaratory relief -- a declaration by the court interpreting, in this case, a contract -- to the effect that the Scruggs Law Firm doesn't owe some $1.7 million in fees to Zuckerman Spaeder, a D.C. law firm that, as I wrote about here, withdrew from representing the Rigsbys in March because of non-payment.
You may remember that the Rigsbys have testified in the Renfroe case that Scruggs agreed to defend and indemnify them if they ran into legal problems for taking State Farm documents illicitly and giving them to Scruggs. Unfortunately for them and others, this agreement is not in writing, so its exact contours are, like so many agreements Scruggs has been in, subject to conjecture.
In this new lawsuit, Scruggs says he doesn't owe the fees -- the former Scruggs Katrina Group owes them, because he made the agreement with the Rigsbys and hired the Zuckerman firm under authority of the SKG. Without going back to check on every detail, just off the top of my head, I would say I think Scruggs has at least a point here, and he may be correct. The SKG certainly knew the Rigsbys were retained for a "sham consultancy" -- in the words of Judge L.T. Senter Jr. -- and I think also the funds for the Rigsbys' $150,000-per-year "salaries" were advanced by Scruggs but ultimately paid by the SKG.
The bigger question is whether Scruggs asked the rest of the SKG about the defense and indemnity agreement beforehand, if he was authorized as a joint venturer to bind them to such an agreement, and if they subsequently ratified the agreement by part performance.
Disputes about fees are always interesting, because it is the only time you will see a lawyer denounce high fees. Normally, you bring up the subject of a fee being too large to a lawyer, and the reaction is like you suggested he could save money on suits by buying only the coat but no pants -- just totally crazy. In this lawsuit, Scruggs is saying $1.7 million in fees is way too high. (I'm sure Himself would never charge or accept massive legal fees). That is a lot of money, but the Zuckerman firm's rates are probably pretty high, and this is something that would have been known in advance. Also, they probably had to do a lot of work and had difficult conditions to do it in. We'll see. I'm inclined to be sympathetic to lawyers who get stiffed on fees.
Judge William M. Acker Jr. has ruled that key Scruggs Katrina co-operators Cori and Kerry Rigsby must pay $65,000 in contempt fines, and Scruggs is continuing to fight those payments on the renegade insurance adjusters' behalf, with not much time...
What a joke. Is there anybody who seriously doubts that Richard Scruggs WAS the SKG? Okay, okay, so he rounded up some lawyers to take on the grunt work and christened them the Scruggs Katrina Group, but, really, are we to doubt that Scruggs himself called every single shot of consequence? (Undoubtedly, the SKG had some high-ego lawyers who would vociferously dispute this. Or... would they, given the present dispute?) If Scruggs is trying to pass the present buck off to a group of lackeys (with apologies to the judge) who had little choice but to ratify every-move-he-make-every-breath-he-take, I can think of only two words: alter ego. This was all Scruggs' doing, and he should have to clean up the entire mess, with a mop made out of his own money.
Hope that Mayo and Mallette got a big retainer up front from Dickie, like enouth to cover all their expected time and expenses on this suit.
Since discovery plays part in civil litigation, is this Dickie Smug's way to screw SKG/KLG since he knows he's already screwed?
Entertained, you are exactly right that Scruggs called all the shots in the SKG. He made the attorneys he conned into this mess all think that he was a knight in shining armor. Cannot believe he is now trying to make them pay for his poor, poor decisions!!
Not so fast, Entertained. Didn't Nutt contend (not just for criminal liability purposes) that his sole repsonsbility was pumping cash into SKG? If so, I would think Dickie -- whom it's hard for me to support for any purpose -- may have a valid point: Nutt knew all about the Twisted Sisters, Nutt approved the advance and reimbursed it, Nutt at least (if not the rest of SKG's members) should now pump enough cash in to get rid of this pesky Zuckerman invoice. And if Nutt says no, what if Dickie were to remember that he and Nutt discussed the Lackey sweet potatoes, too -- not after they were paid, but before?
3dSo -- It's an interesting question. It seems Nutt was the major money guy. But unquestionably, Scruggs was the media darling, the PR wizard, the one whose magic wand dispensed all the glitter. Irrespective of what Nutt could have made happen on his own, Dickie was the one who gave birth to the SKG and now has the stretch marks to show for it. If Nutt's firm was reimbursing invoices because Dickie said "this is my show and this is how we're gonna run it," then I think there's an argument to be made that the SKG veil can be pierced to reveal the weary image of Oz, AKA our pal Dickie, who might by then be perched uncomfortably on the edge of his metal cot, waiting to go home.
Real classy, Dickie. PL Blake must've really done something amazing to avoid getting stiffed by Dickie.
I think P.L. Blake REALLY knows where the bodies are buried.
Could P L Blake be Dickie's son. He sure seems to be willing to do more to protect Blake than he's willing to do for Zach.
Dickie made a living going after big co's with deep pockets.
Now, Dickie is the one with the pile of money who is now the target of many- all of whom have filed suit to get a piece of the action.
How Ironic?
"One line of the complaint, authored by attorneys J. Cal Mayo and Pope Mallette, reads, "Scruggs is not and has never been a member in SKG."" LNL
Is Scruggs word worthless?
The name of the group was the "Scruggs" Katrina Group, and now he's saying he was never a member.
Word games I'm sure. Probably saying the Scruggs Firm was a member, but not Dickie personally.
Another low for the new felon, IMO.
Ironic
Does anyone think Dickie has less than FIFTY MILLION socked away -- probably more like EIGHTY MILLION? This is one more example of what got him in trouble bribing Lackey: not a need for money, but the desire to "win" by cheating someone (like Jones and no telling how many others) out of something he thinks they don't deserve. Why else claim never to have been a member of the SCRUGGS Katrina Group? It's a game with Dickie and the MO is to show the "little people" (sorry to invoke Leona Helmsley, but I swear they must be twins separated at birth) who's boss, and who's smarter, and who's meaner, and who's tougher, and who can always find a way to wheedle and scratch and claw the way to "winning" over them.
I have finally identified a movie character that was patterned after Dickie: Smegel/ Golom from "Lord of the Rings". I can see him in a quiet private place holding his treasures and growling "my precious". His personality seems to shift between naughty and nice- mostly naughty. His stature....he has it all, except his feet and hands are too small.
Hey David!
Are you on strike or something?