Practice Management

Good grief!  Dickie Scruggs gets 5 years in prison for trying to bribe a judge.

Richard "Dickie" Scruggs, who became one of the wealthiest civil lawsuit attorneys in the country by taking on tobacco, asbestos and insurance companies, was sentenced Friday to five years in prison for conspiring to bribe a judge.  He gained fame in the 1990s by using a corporate insider against tobacco companies in lawsuits that resulted in a $206 billion settlement.  He nearly fainted as the judge scolded him for his conduct, and people in the courtroom gasped as he swayed side to side.

He was fined $250,000 and given 5 years after telling the Court.,"I could not be more ashamed of where I am today, mixed up in a judicial bribery scheme.  I have disappointed everyone in my life."

Scruggs was indicted in November along with his son and a law partner after an associate wore a wire for the FBI and secretly recorded conversations about the bribe plan. Prosecutors said he wanted a favorable ruling in a dispute over $26.5 million in legal fees from a mass settlement of Hurricane Katrina insurance cases.

He initially denied wrongdoing in the bribery attempt case. But in March, Scruggs and former law partner Sidney Backstrom pleaded guilty to conspiring to bribe Lafayette County Circuit Court Judge Henry Lackey with $50,000.

The Judge said that after reviewing evidence, including the secretly recorded conversations, "it made me think perhaps this was not the first time you did this because you did it so easily. And there is evidence before the court that you have done it before."  And, in fact, prosecutors are looking into another alleged bribery conspiracy in which Scruggs is accused of trying to influence a different judge in a dispute over legal fees from asbestos cases. Scruggs' former defense attorney has pleaded guilty in that case and is cooperating with investigators.

In my experience, when you hear or see a trial lawyer whose seems to make it all seem too easy, there is something behind it.

From the standpoint of the Bar and the judiciary, this is extremely bad.  We have to be able to believe that the judiciary is fair and impartial.  People by the nature of winning and losing already are prone to believe it is not.  This just confirms for people that it is not.  As well, too many people -- and corporations and insurance companies -- already desire to hire attorneys that are not honest.  I understand it is a matter of degree, but there are already too many attorneys that have gotten to comfortable with gaming and in being shifty.