Insurance Law

Return of the Trailer Lawyers? Missouri lawyers fail to accept disqualification

By David Rossmiller

A few weeks ago, it was Bye Bye Trailer Lawyer Pie. But the Trailer Lawyers, bless 'em, are not willing to haul their trailer off quietly into the sunset.    

The Trailer Lawyers have now filed an eight-page rant against State "Snake" Farm and, strangely enough, Judge L.T. Senter Jr., who disqualified them.  The rant is entitled Motion for Reconsideration, and it is based on such new and dynamic allegations and conclusions as  these:

• State Farm should be known as "Snake Farm" for its treacherousness, and its lawyers must themselves be disqualified because they knew of the Rigsby sisters' sham consultant arrangement.
• Reporter Anita Lee of the Sun Herald wrote a story in 2006 about the sisters' consultant arrangement with Dickie Scruggs and so she also must be disqualified.    
• Judge Senter imposed higher levels of scrutiny on the Trailer Lawyers than he had in some other instances, and this is very unfair, so he must be disqualified.
• Everybody who has been talking about the Trailer Lawyers has their facts all wrong and so everybody must be disqualified.
• The Trailer Lawyers should be un-disqualified because they are without blame, and because they merely entered the trailer to watch Dr. Phil, have a few brews and eat some Doritos.  Dr. Phil, however, must be disqualified.
• The word "trailer" must be disqualified and is not to be used, particularly in connection with the Trailer Lawyers.

I paraphrase and exaggerate for effect, of course, but that's the general tone, and remarkably, some of these exaggerated points are really what the Trailer Lawyers wrote.  If your intent was actually to get a federal judge to reconsider his ruling, there probably are better ways to do it than to call him out in an extended diatribe. 

Incidentally, this is as good an excuse as we may get for some time to reprise the Trailer Lawyer anthem: Bye Bye Trailer Lawyer Pie, the lyrics of which are available at this earlier post. 

Full post as published by Insurance Coverage Law Blog on June 03, 2008 (boomark / email).