Great Moments in Legal Advertising: Hammer Time
Why is it that advertising plaintiff lawyers like to be the hammer? Consider this commercial for the Texas Hammer:
Which led to some kid making this hillarious parody:
$8.3 Million Attorney Fee Sought in Attorney General Jim Hood Microsoft Action
Plaintiff’s attorneys are seeking an $8.3 million attorney’s fee following a $40 million settlement between Microsoft and the State of Mississippi stemming from allegations that Microsoft monopolized the personal computer market in Mississippi. Here is a copy of the Petition to Approve Fees. The amount of the attorney's fee must be approved by the trial court in the case.
Plaintiff’s counsel who stand to benefit in the case are Brent Hazzard of Jackson, Susman Godfrey of Houston, Boies Schiller of New York, Precious Martin of Jackson, John Gadow of Jackson and Richard Schwartz of Jackson.
The Petition states that the requested fee represents 7.5% of the total gross settlement. According to the Petition, Plaintiff’s counsel paid over $1.7 million in out-of-pocket expenses over the course of the litigation and expended millions of dollars worth of attorney time in the case. Mississippi State Auditor Stacey Pickering filed an objection to the fee claiming that a special legislative appropriation is required to pay Plaintiff’s counsel the fee specified in their contract with Attorney General Hood.
The dispute seems to be political. A 7.5% contingency fee is not a big fee. Mississippi Republicans have been critical of A.G. actions going back to the days of Governor Fordice trying to stop the tobacco litigation asserted by Attorney General Mike Moore. It would be interesting to see what would happen if a Republican became Attorney General. Would Republicans continue to criticize the A.G. hiring outside counsel to represent the State? Or would the criticism end and the only real difference be the political affiliation of the outside lawyers being hired by the A.G. to represent the State?
Miss. Supreme Court Rules Service of Process by Mail Not Effective When Returned as "Unclaimed/ Refused"
In a 6–3 decision the Mississippi Supreme Court held in Bloodgood v. Leatherwood that service of process by mail under Miss. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(5) is not effective when the Postal Service returned the mailing marked “Unclaimed/Refused.” Justice Dickinson wrote the majority opinion.
Miss. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(5) allows service of process by certified mail on persons outside the State. The rule states that: “[s]ervice by this method shall be deemed complete as of the date of delivery as evidenced by the return receipt or by the returned envelope marked ‘Refused’.” The opinion states that the U.S. Postal Service no longer specifies whether mail was unclaimed or refused and now uses the singular designation “Unclaimed/ Refused”. The majority reasoned that unclaimed and refused have different meanings and that the joint designation renders impossible a determination of whether a mailing was refused or unclaimed. The Court relied on a U.S. Supreme Court case that held that a mailing returned as unclaimed failed to satisfy due process requirements.
The Court ruled that the trial court improperly found that the defendant was properly served, but remanded the case for a determination of whether the plaintiff could show good cause for the failure to serve process within 120 days.
Justice Graves dissented and was joined by Chief Justice Waller and Justice Kitchens. The dissent argued that service of process complied with Rule 4(c)(5) because:
- the mailing was returned with the marking “Unclaimed Refused”;
- the Postal Service attempted to deliver the mailing to the correct address;
- the Postal Service attempted delivery three times;
- the addressee received notice of each of the three attempted deliveries; and
- the defendant was aware of the Complaint, since she filed an Answer.
Both the majority and dissenting opinions are logical and have a point. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will recognize that the Postal Service “Unclaimed/ Refused” designation plays havoc with the language of Rule 4(c)(5). The Court should amend the rule to account for the new designation. The provision deeming service as effective when a mailing is returned as “refused” is meaningless if the Postal Service now stamps everything that is either unclaimed or refused as “Unclaimed/ Refused.”
President Obama Can't Blame Republicans for Lack of Nominations
As Jeffrey Toobin asks where the judges are, this Houston Chronicle article from last week confirms that President Obama is dragging his feet at filling judicial vacancies and nominating U.S. Attorneys.
The stats tell the story. By this point in their administrations Presidents Clinton and W. Bush had nominated 75 and 66 U.S. Attorneys respectively. Obama has nominated only 42.Of the 42 that have been nominated, 31 have been confirmed.
The article notes that the failure to fill the slots has negative consequences:
“There's no real boss. It means what will be done is the routine. You need a guy who can move the team, and he has to be on the president's team,”
In Mississippi there have been no rumblings of political fights with respect to the vacant U.S. Attorney positions or the vacant U.S. District Court position and 5th Circuit Court of Appeals position. Blaming Republicans for the slow pace at filling slots rings hallow when the administrations is going so slowly at making nominations and 75% of those nominated have been confirmed.
Like Mississippi, Texas has all its U.S. Attorney slots still open. The Chronicle article suggests that political fighting is the cause:
A classic political stalemate pitting Texas' Democratic congressional delegation and Obama's administration against Texas' pair of Republican senators is partly to blame for the slowed process here. Similar fights in other states, as well as an especially cautious presidential nominating process, have left most of the nation without freshly appointed lead federal prosecutors, who direct law enforcement priorities and approve work on the big projects.
People understand that the administration has been busy with the health care bill, the wars, the terrorist attack, etc.. But the White House has to be able to multi-task and get things done. If President Obama continues to delay in making nominations, then there will be a growing risk that Republicans can stall long enough to prevent Obama from filling all the vacancies that he inherited or came open in his first year. To Democrats, that would be unconscionable.
Adding to the frustration level for Democrats is that the President could fix the problem on his end in a matter of weeks. He could set a meeting date a few weeks out when Obama and his advisors would review the candidates for each vacancy and the President would make a decision. If the President does not have people working for him who can meet such a deadline, particularly after this long already, then he needs a better staff.
Democrats are frustrated. Republicans are giggling behind the President’s back and the President is starting to look like the Cowardly Lion and a possible one term president. That all needs to change in a hurry.
Jackson Needs to Plan for Next Water Crisis and Other Expected Disasters
You can flush a toilet again in Jackson this week as the City has emerged from last week’s water crisis caused by freezing temperatures and bad pipes. The talk has now shifted to the City’s decaying infrastructure and what should be done to prevent the next water crisis. Being skeptical of the City’s ability to replace the existing water system, I would rather see Jackson planning for the next disaster.
There was a needless delay in getting water restored last week because Mayor Johnson decided to go at it alone for a couple of days before getting help from other area municipalities. That shouldn’t happen next time the pipes break. Jackson should have an agreement with other area municipalities where the cities agree to send in crews when one city is overwhelmed by breaks, such as happened to Jackson last week.
Next, leaders of Jackson and other area cities should plan for other disasters that will happen sooner or later. Will will see a bad tornado in Central Mississippi in the next 30 years. Wherever it hits the local government will need help. Why not make plans for that contingency now? The same goes for floods (Jackson is over-due for one), ice storms, etc…
Time is of the essence in a time of crisis, and just having a list with the phone numbers for everyone to call for help will save time. In addition, it will help to have help quickly on the way from other cities who were not hit by the disaster.
Jackson may not be able to fix the bad water pipes, but it can learn from the water crisis how to better deal with the next crisis.
Book Review: Trial and Error- The Education of a Courtroom Lawyer, by John C. Tucker
John Tucker is a former partner with the prominent Chicago based law firm Jenner and Block. Before retiring to concentrate on writing, Tucker had an outstanding career as a litigator than included arguing two cases before the U.S. Supreme Court and serving as trial counsel in several high-profile cases.
Tucker’s trials included defending the “Chicago Eight”, who were prosecuted for conspiracy and inciting to riot following protests at the 1968 Democratic National Convention, and representing the plaintiffs in the Contract Buyers League cases in Chicago, which sought to end housing discrimination against African-Americans in Chicago.
The book contains much wisdom about trials, litigation, and the practice of law. My favorite observations about litigation included:
- A client's gratitude is a fragile reed.
- Litigation can be conducted calmly, with polite respect for your opponent and his client, without losing anything in the way of effectiveness. Litigation can also be conducted like a street fight, without really gaining anything.
- The trial of a case is a competition, and if you plan to make your living doing it, you better have a competitive nature-an intense desire to win. That desire must be accompanied by an understanding of the rules and a willingness to play by them.
- In the American legal system, a lawyer's job is not to seek justice, but to win the case for his client. The primary objective of our legal system is not to determine the truth, but to resolve disputes peacefully. Besides, in most cases where the facts are disputed, no one but the clients know for certain where the truth lies, and often they aren't really sure.
- Of all the mistakes made even by experienced trial lawyers the most common is failure to adjust to changing circumstances in the heat of battle. Time and again, lawyers plow ahead with questions they had planned to ask on cross-examination even though a witnesses previous answer has rendered the planned questions unnecessary, or even dangerous.
- The most important thing a trial lawyer does is develop a logical theory of the case that can be supported by the evidence.
- Courtroom lawyers and people who play sports are engaged in an endeavor where there is a winner and loser of every contest, and no matter how good they are, sometimes they lose.In fact, in both endeavors it is often true that the better they are the harder their contests and the more often they will lose. You don't have to like it-in fact, you had better not-but you won't last long if you don't learn to get over it, or at least put it far enough behind you to go on to the next case.
- A trial lawyer can be quiet or loud, gregarious or shy, pretty or ugly, and just about anything else you can think of except lacking in self-confidence.
The book also contained a few laugh-out-loud observations, including:
- The judge, J. Sam Perry, was a senior member of the court. Perry had grown up in Alabama, but spent most of his adult life in the same western suburb where Tom Sullivan grew up. Perry was no legal heavyweight, but he had a reputation as something of a populist, with sympathy for the underdog. On balance, we thought he was not too bad a draw. We didn't realize until the trial started that an Alabama populist-at least one of Judge Perry's age-is still from Alabama.
- A lesson in the virtues of law-firm seniority. In January and February a senior-partner conducted a series of depositions in Florida and Puerto Rico while Tucker (a junior associate) held down the fort in Minnesota and North Dakota.
The book also succinctly captured the dilemma faced by young trial lawyers working in large law firms:
- The current emphasis on the bottom line [in big law firms] has a special impact on trial lawyers. Profit expectations require hourly rates to be set so high that only major corporations can afford them, and their cases almost never go to trial. You may get moderately rich as a "litigator" for big companies, but if you try a case only once every five years, you won't become much of a trial lawyer.
Most of the cases that Tucker writes about were pro bono cases. Tucker was lucky that his firm allowed him to spend so much time working on pro bono. But he recognizes that in today’s world, few firms would allow associates to devote so much time to pro bono matters. Tucker notes that many of today’s top litigators had to leave their big firm and start their own practice in order to develop their trial skills.
My only negative comment about the book is that I did not find a couple of the cases that Tucker wrote about to be interesting. But overall, it was a great book and I highly recommend it for litigators.
Jackson Mayor Harvey Johnson Fails Water Crisis Leadership Test
When a crisis hits you find out what kind of leadership you have. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour passed the leadership test. In contrast, Louisiana’s leadership failed and were not up to the task.
With Jackson in a water crisis its citizens are finding out that like Louisiana’s leaders after Katrina, Jackson Mayor Harvey Johnson is not up to the task. There are literally out-houses on Capital Street (see picture) and throughout Jackson as businesses try to stay open without plumbing. But most restaurants, all schools and many other businesses must stay closed.
Meanwhile, Mayor Harvey Johnson continues to refuse to hire private contractors to help:
Johnson said the city has taken quotes from private contractors, but so far the city has elected to go with its own crews and the help supplied by other governments. The mayor repeated his analogy comparing the crisis to other natural disasters.
"If we had ice on the ground, people would be much more understanding," he said. "We have a disaster. It's just not one you can see."
Johnson said citizens need to understand the damage to the water system requires a great deal of resources from the city, "one of which is time."
Yesterday Jackson had only four crews making repairs. With the help from other cities the number climbed to ten. That’s nowhere near enough, particularly since there are private crews ready to step in.
Johnson’s analogy to an ice storm is half right. People would understand, but they would also see power company crews from all over the nation in the city fixing the problem. People would know that Entergy was doing everything possible to fix the problem. Here, Harvey Johnson is telling us that he is not doing everything possible. People are mad not because they can't see the problem, people are mad because they can see that not enough is being done to fix the problem. Johnson just doesn't get it on multiple levels.
Closed businesses means a loss of sales tax revenue for Jackson. Not hiring private contractors does not save Jackson money. It costs Jackson money. Even worse, it causes people to not trust Mayor Johnson:
Try telling [Johnson's B.S.] to west Jackson retiree Chrestene James, 66, who was one of many to see the last drop of water trickle away Monday morning, leaving her household of five dry.
"This is a mess. This is a mess," she said. "We can't even take a deep freeze. I'm disgusted."
We can’t take a deep freeze and we can’t do what it takes to fix a disaster. Pitiful leadership. Just pitiful.
Jackson Needs to Call in the Calvalry to Help with Water Crisis
Business in Jackson is at a stand-still today because of the water crisis. The City’s reaction to the crisis reinforces public scepticism about the City’s leadership. Today's Clarion-Ledger states:
Four city crews, augmented by workers from other departments, were working in 12-hour shifts - and [Mayor Harvey] Johnson said he was evaluating prices from private contractors that likely will have to be hired. Johnson said he could not estimate how long it would take or what it will cost to fix the breaks.
Four crews? Water lines are broken all over the City and we have four crews on it? While Harvey Johnson thinks about getting more help? Words cannot describe how ridiculous that is.
The City of Jackson needs to follow the example of utility companies after storms and call in all available outside help to fix the broken water lines. That’s what you do in these situations. You don’t perform a study to see how cheaply you can get the job done. The City not being operational costs the City sales tax revenue and causes the City leadership to lose the confidence of the people. That further fuels the exodus from Jackson.
If Harvey Johnson ran a power company, people would still be waiting to get their lights on after Katrina.
Trustree: Wahab Gang Stole Investors' Money--Did Russell Mackert Commit Perjury in A&O Affidavits?
The big news in the A&O debacle last week was this Complaint that the A&O bankruptcy trustee Patrick Collins filed against Adley Abdulwahab, Brent Oncale, Russell Mackert, Christian Allmedinger, Shepard Capital Management (Mackert’s company) and A&O. The Complaint alleges that the defendants stole the A&O investors' money. A while back I asked where did the investors’ money go and stated:
There, as in the bankruptcy proceeding, A&O and Mackert claim that Physician's Trust LLC bought A&O, asked Mackert to manage it and then disappeared. Literally. The supposed owner of A&O paid millions for the company to Adley Wahab and his partners and then disappeared without a trace? And they can't be found? That makes no sense and just defies all credibility. I don't believe it. No one believes it. I suspect that one day the truth will emerge, and I can't wait to hear it.
The Complaint alleges that the sale of A&O was an “illusion” in response to regulatory investigations in multiple states. “The sale was a sham” and Wahab, Oncale and Mackert maintained control over the A&O financial accounts. The Complaint alleges that at least $37 million was transfered to the A&O principals for their personal use. The Complaint seeks the recovery of these funds.
The Complaint refers to the sale of A&O to Physicians Trust and Blue Dymond as the purported sale of the A&O entities. The Complaint does not state whether Physicians Trust and Blue Dymond are legitimate companies separate and apart from Wahab et al. or whether RJ Stephenson is a real person. At this point, however, there is no credible evidence that Stephenson is a real person or that Physicians Trust and Blue Dymond are legitimate.
No observers of the A&O debacle are surprised by these new allegations. But the allegations raise new questions about the veracity of A&O front man Russell Mackert and whether he committed perjury in connection with affidavits that A&O filed in the Colson litigation in Mississippi.
In this affidavit Mackert testified that the A&O principles sold the company to Physicians Trust and Blue Dymond, whose principal was RJ Stephens. According the Mackert, Stephens then disappeared into thin air like Keyser Söze in the movie The Usual Suspects. As pointed out by wikepedia: “the… use of the name in popular culture is a shorthand reference to being fooled by the actual bad guy into believing in a bad guy that doesn't exist.”
According to the trustees’ Complaint, the A&O sale was a sham—and Mackert knew it. If this allegation is true, then Mackert may have committed perjury in his affidavits filed in Mississippi.
Perjury is lying under oath in a judicial proceeding. An affidavit is sworn testimony under oath in a judicial proceeding. Was Mackert’s affidavit perjury? The United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Mississippi may want to know.
Miss. Supreme Court Vacates Two Verdicts in One Case Due to Confused Jury
On Thursday the Mississippi Supreme Court vacated two Jones County jury verdicts rendered in one trial in Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc. v. Malone and remanded the case for further proceedings. Here is the Court's opinion. Justice Lamar wrote for the Court.
The case stemmed from Gary Malone's right leg amputation two years after he suffered a work-related injury. Malone sued Gallagher and his employer Nabors Drilling. Malone alleged that defendants committed a bad-faith delay in paying his workers comp. claim, causing a delay in medical treatment that led to the amputation of his leg.
Nabors filed a cross-claim against Gallagher and entered into a Mary Carter agreement with Malone under which Nabors admitted to bad-faith (by Gallagher) and paid Malone $1.5 million in exchange for the first $250,000 of any sums that Malone recovered from Gallagher and half of any additional sums recovered.
Malone’s claim and Nabors’s cross-claim were tried together. The jury rendered a verdict for Malone on his claim and awarded $250,000 in damages with fault apportioned among Gallagher (42.5%), Nabors (42.5%) and Malone (15%). The trial court entered final judgments against Nabors and Gallagher in the amounts of $106,250 each.
In a separate verdict the jury found for Nabors on its cross-claim against Gallagher and awarded damages in the amount of $1.25 million. The trial court did not submit the issue of punitive damages to the jury.
The Court found that the two verdicts were inconsistent and, therefore, the jury had to be confused. One jury instruction stated that in order to find for Nabors on its cross-claim the jury must find that nothing Nabors did contributed to Malone’s damages. But the jury both assessed fault to Nabors (42.5%) and found for Nabors on its cross-claim. The Court could not reconcile these inconsistent verdicts and vacated both verdicts and remanded the case.
The Court “strongly urge[d]” the trial court to sever Nabors’s cross-claim so that Malone’s claim and Nabors’s cross-claim are not tried in the same proceeding. You have to feel for the trial judge on this point [Judge Billy Joe Landrum], since no party asked for separate trials.
Notwithstanding the loss of his leg, you don't have to feel particularly sorry for the plaintiff and his attorneys, since they get to keep the $1.5 million that Nabors already paid to plaintiff.
All participating justices concurred except for Justice Chandler, who argued in a dissent that the judgment against Gallagher should be reversed and rendered due to a lack of evidence of gross negligence, malice or reckless disregard.
Deuce McAllister is a Two Touchdown Underdog in Nissan Lawsuit
When the economy crashed in 2008 many previously viable car dealerships went bankrupt due to the huge decrease in sales. Deuce McAllister Nissan in South Jackson was one of the dealerships that went out of business. The dealership was owned by Deuce McAllister, the former star running back for Ole Miss and the New Orleans Saints.
In December the Clarion-Ledger reported under the headline “McAllister files suit against Nissan” that Deuce and Nissan are in a $1.5 million lawsuit stemming from Deuce's personal guaranty of the dealership's operations. Deuce filed a counterclaim in response to Nissan’s Complaint. A more accurate news headline would have been “Deuce on the Hook for $1.5 Million Owed by Failed Nissan Dealership.”
On Thursday Kingfish posted links to the Complaint, Answer and Counterclaim, Nissan’s Motion to Dismiss Counterclaim and Deuce’s Amended Counterclaim. Nissan’s claims are primarily based on its Financing and Security Agreement with Deuce’s dealership and Deuce’s personal guaranty of the dealership’s obligations. You might think that Deuce has the home field advantage in the case, since it is pending in Jackson and everyone loves Deuce. You would be wrong.
Franchise and dealership agreements are drafted by the franchisor’s or manufacturer’s lawyers based on a company’s collective knowledge gained from many years of experience. The terms of the agreement are rarely negotiated and are heavily stacked in favor of the manufacturer/ franchisor. Nissan and other companies like it have been in many lawsuits seeking to collect under personal guarantees against individuals such as Deuce, and they almost always win.
Deuce claims that Nissan "was guilty of negligence in the performance of its obligations under the contracts.." and concealed information from Deuce. The counterclaim does not provide specific details of Nissan's alleged misconduct, nor does it cite any contractual provisions that Nissan breached.
I do not see a negligence theory working in this case. There were contracts between the parties and the contracts controlled. Either Nissan breached its obligations under the contracts or it didn't, and I suspect that it didn't.
It is common for individuals in a similar position as Deuce to file a counterclaim against the manufacturer or even sue first in a preemptive strike in an attempt to gain leverage in negotiating a decent settlement. But it almost never works. It usually ends up being this simple: (1) the dealership, which is now in bankruptcy, owes Nissan the money; (2) Deuce is personally liable for the dealership’s obligations; so (3) Deuce has to pay Nissan the $1.5 million. If this was a football game, Deuce would be at least a two touchdown underdog to win the game.
Nissan's attorneys are Jeff Barber and Chad Hammons at Watkins Ludlam. Deuce's lawyer is Joe Roberts of Jackson.
Quotes Overheard from Justice Scalia's Duck Blind
On Monday Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia spoke to a group of 600 people in Jackson. Scalia made an interesting comment about the trend of all Supreme Court Justice appointments coming from the bench of lower courts:
Scalia said there were three justices with no prior judicial experience when he was nominated to the court by President Ronald Reagan. Today there are none.
"Every aspect of your career broadens your outlook and gives insights that you wouldn't have in some other aspect of the legal practice," Scalia said. "That's why I think it's good for the court to have people of varying backgrounds."
I think that is a valid point, but I do not see the trend changing anytime soon.
An avid outdoorsman, I’m sure that it was just a coincidence that Justice Scalia spoke in Mississippi during the height of duck season. Scalia is rumored to he hunting in the Delta with a group that includes several Mississippi attorneys and judges.
Below are some of the quotes that I envision coming from Scalia’s duck blind:
-
“Great shot, Justice.”
-
“I think you were the one who got him Justice”
-
“You got another one Justice”
-
“I couldn't have, I didn’t even shoot at that one.”
-
“You’re right Justice. You’re always right.”
-
“I think you were too far to the right on that shot Justice.”
-
“Thank you for not inviting Dick Cheney—I didn't want to get shot this week.”
Growing Number of Blogs Critical of Law Schools
With the legal job market in shambles, there is a growing number of blogs devoted to criticizing law schools for not doing more to educate potential students about the difficulties in finding a job after law school. Examples include:
Third Tier Reality– My goal is to inform potential law school students and applicants of the ugly realities of attending law school. DO NOT ATTEND UNLESS: (1) YOU GET INTO A TOP 8 LAW SCHOOL; (2) YOU GET A FULL-TUITION SCHOLARSHIP TO ATTEND; (3) YOU HAVE EMPLOYMENT AS AN ATTORNEY SECURED THROUGH A RELATIVE OR CLOSE FRIEND; OR (4) YOU ARE FULLY AWARE BEFOREHAND THAT YOUR HUGE INVESTMENT IN TIME, ENERGY, AND MONEY DOES NOT, IN ANY WAY, GUARANTEE A JOB AS AN ATTORNEY OR IN THE LEGAL INDUSTRY.
Exposing the Law School Scam– This blog is written by a coalition of lawyers dedicated to exposing the "law school scam." In particular, we are interested in exposing the dramatic oversupply of lawyers, and how that oversupply has been caused by bogus employment and income/salary statistics used by most law schools to induce applicants to apply to law school. Also, we are concerned with how the legal establishment is complicit in this "law school scam."
Esq. Never– One law school graduate's attempt to find a fulfilling career in spite of his legal education.
These blogs also provide links to other blogs devoted to slamming law schools and the legal profession.
Mississippi’s law schools need to educate applicants about the realities of the difficult job market. My non-scientific polling of current law students indicates that law schools do not warn students about the weak job market until after students are enrolled and are finding it difficult to find clerkships and permanent jobs. Of course, by that point the train has left the station.
I agree with the comments by William Henderson, a professor at the Indiana University School of Law. Harrison states that “all [students] believe they are going to be in the top 10% of their class, and they have this vision of the profession that doesn’t exist. And law schools don’t try to dispel those myths to potential applicants.”
The realities are different. Everyone who gets into law school is intelligent—at least on some level. [I concede that many are idiots on other levels, but that is a discussion for another day.] But over 90% of those who start law school will not finish in the top 10% of their class. The reason that it’s over 90% is that people will quit along the way. For instance, if you start with a class of 200 and 50 quit before graduation, there are 15 people who finish in the top 10%—not 20.
A handful of students starting Mississippi law schools will get a job at a big firm with a starting salary north of $80,000. And some people who don’t measure happiness by the amount of their salary consider the big-firm grads the losers in the class, due to the difficulties in having a balanced happy life in big law. Other grads will be scrambling for jobs making less—sometimes far less. Often these individuals end up bitter because they are not making more money, which means that they are unhappy and do a bad job at work.
At the end of the day, most legal industry jobs end up like most jobs. As in other industries, the profession is filled with people who are unhappy and feel like they are underpaid. But that is not what people expect to happen when they decide to go to law school.
NMC Notices Pattern in Jerry Mitchell's DeLaughter Stories
NMC had a great observation over the weekend on Jerry Mitchell’s Clarion-Ledger stories on Bobby DeLaughter:
The story has no news in it (except possibly the note that DeLaughter has not responded to the state bar’s petition to disbar him) and a lot of comment from Matt Steffey, who observes “Fundamentally Bobby DeLaughter is a good public servant who made some serious criminal mistakes.” The article also states: “Steffey said he foresees DeLaughter working for a law firm as a jury consultant, strategist, arbitrator, mediator or the like.” I really have the sense that Mitchell is using Steffey as the reliable voice (as in always available to say what Mitchell wants in the story) for his feeling that DeLaughter’s prosecution of Evers should define DeLaughter, and not the pattern of corruption with Ed Peters as a judge.
Meanwhile, I find Steffey’s prediction that DeLaughter will find work as a jury consultant, strategist, arbitrator or mediator to be very naive. Here are several reasons for why I believe that Steffey is wrong:
-
I find it difficult to believe that any law firm will hire DeLaughter for any reason. He is going to be a disbarred pariah in the legal industry when he gets out of jail.
-
DeLaughter is not qualified to be a jury consultant. Professional jury consultants typically have a university education and research experience in fields such as psychology, sociology or behavioral sciences. In addition, in most Mississippi venues a local person who “knows everyone” is more valuable than a professional consultant.
-
I’m not sure what a “strategist” is, but it sounds like practicing law. DeLaughter will not be able to practice law.
-
Arbitration is on the decline. But even if it was not, who would agree to DeLaughter arbitrating their case? Plaintiff lawyers already have to deal with the perception by many of their clients that the legal system is crooked and corporations and other powerful litigants routinely “pay off” someone to get a favorable ruling. I can’t see plaintiff lawyers attempting to convince their clients to let DeLaughter decide their dispute. The same applies to defense lawyers, but for slightly different reasons. Insurance companies and corporations are much less likely than individual plaintiffs to believe that someone in the legal system has been “paid off.” But this does not mean that they blindly trust the system. Also, adjusters and in-house counsel are always thinking about how they can defend a decision within the company. Agreeing to allow DeLaughter to arbitrate a dispute would not be a decision that these individuals would feel comfortable defending to their superiors.
-
DeLaughter can’t be a mediator in a court ordered mediation, since the Mississippi Supreme Court requires court ordered mediators to be members of the Bar. As far as non-court ordered mediators, why would anyone hire DeLaughter? There are more mediators in Mississippi than there are mediations to go around, including many retired judges. I don’t see DeLaughter getting hired to mediate before retired judges such as Judge Charles Pickering or Judge Frank Vollor, not to mention established mediators such as Larry Latham, Bobby Sneed or Anne Veazey.
-
The legal community is not willing to accept that DeLaughter was a good public servant who made a couple of mistakes. The problem with this is that we do not know if it was a couple of mistakes or a long pattern of corrupt conduct. And even if it was only a couple of mistakes, DeLaughter exercised such poor judgment in making the mistakes that I do not see him ever regaing the trust of the legal community.
I can see DeLaughter writing books after his release. It’s Never Too Late was a good read and DeLaughter has a lot of interesting life experiences from which to draw.
