Insurance Law

Injunction against Hood extended through date of hearing, State Farm notices deposition of Scruggs in Hood injunction case

By David Rossmiller

How bad is it, just how embarrassing is it, for a state Attorney General to get tagged with an injunction by the company he spent months demonizing and investigating? Probably about as bad as: 

• Having to sit silently in your office for months, and on the few occasions when you do speak, having to pretend to get all excited about going after makers of fake contact lenses and foreign toys.  No matter what they say, no AG wants to be known as Lens Master or The Toy Fighter.
• Having to keep a blank look on one's face, stare into the distance and talk about how it looks like rain whenever anyone mentions Dickie Scruggs, Joey Langston or Tim Balducci.
• Having to find a removal specialist for your tattoo that says "Jim, Tim, Dickie and Joey: Best Friends Forever and Ever!!! Party On!! I will never forget you, dudes!"
• Dictating the same thing to your Dictaphone again and again and again: "Memo to self -- find way to be relevant once more."

Well, as we discussed yesterday, Jim Hood is once again ready for action -- he wants to dissolve that State Farm injunction and kick some more insurance company fanny.  Why? Don't ask why! That's just how Hood rolls. You might as well ask him about Dickie Scruggs! And you know what the answer would be? That's right: "It looks like rain." Because it's none of your business, chump. 

Yesterday, in State Farm v. Hood, here's what happened.

This order by Judge David Bramlette extended the State Farm injunction through the date of the hearing on Hood's motion to dissolve it -- February 6.

This order by Magistrate Judge Michael Parker orders Hood to appear at the hearing to testify, and also allows State Farm to take the deposition of Dickie Scruggs for use at the hearing "as this witness many be outside of the subpoena power of this court and, therefore, may not be available to testify live at the hearing."  Why wouldn't Scruggs be available?  Hmmm, what if he pleaded guilty and were in custody elsewhere?  Of course, the reference could simply be to the rules on trial subpoenas, which state that they are enforceable on witnesses only if the witness is found in the judicial district or within 100 miles of the courthouse.  It's much easier to get a deposition of someone than it is to make them testify at trial.

State Farm lost no time noticing the deposition of Scruggs for February 1.

Lastly, barring some big developments, I probably am reverting to my normal, pre-Scruggs Nation schedule, which means no posts Saturday or Sunday.  Speaking of the Scruggs Nation, I thought this post on the Scruggs Nation, at the Lexis-Nexis Insurance Law Center, was well written, although why anyone would not be fascinated by what is going on with Dickie Scruggs is beyond me.  I mean, here's Scruggs, a guy who has been to the mountain top, and then, whoops! He slips on the banana peel he himself just threw on the ground, and bounces all the way to the bottom.

The blogger, Tom Hagy, works for Lexis and, full disclosure, I am on the advisory board of the Insurance Law Center and the post is about me.  But that's not the point -- it's a good, entertaining post.  It's harder to do than it looks. 

Full post as published by Insurance Coverage Law Blog on January 25, 2008 (boomark / email).