Eaton Corporation Ready for Plan B?
Eaton Corporation touts itself as one of the world's most ethical companies. Its CEO touts the company's ethical values.
Those ethical values did not extend to Eaton's legal department. As discussed in this post, Hinds County Circuit Judge Swan Yerger unsealed an opinion last week in which he found by clear and convincing evidence that Eaton's in-house and outside counsel cheated in a civil lawsuit.
Judge Yerger's opinion gave “just a few examples from an extensive record of clear and convincing evidence” of Eaton's misconduct by turning Ed Peters loose to play fast a loose with the justice system by improperly contacting and influencing Judge Bobby DeLaughter while remaining behind the scenes in Eaton's billion dollar lawsuit.
So far, Eaton's response to Judge Yerger's ruling is to maintain its innocence and state that it will appeal. The Mississippi Supreme Court's ruling on an appeal will be very interesting. My gut feeling is that at the Supreme Court Eaton is going to run into nine justices who—on the whole—are even less sympathetic to Eaton than Judge Yerger.
I don't know how Eaton can genuinely believe that it will win on appeal. In this August 2009 post, I pointed out that Eaton's arguments did not make sense and suggested that Eaton knew what Peter's was doing.
Eaton knew it hired Peters and that he was working on the case. Eaton has never given a legitimate reason for: (1) why it hired Peters; and (2) why after hiring Peters, it actively made sure that Peters' involvement was concealed from Frisby (the defendant in the lawsuit). Eaton's public attempts to answer these questions have been comically bad.
That will be obvious to the Supreme Court. And that's on top of the specific evidence that Eaton knew what Peters was doing.
Eaton's current lawyers may be telling Eaton this. But if Eaton is taking advice from any of the in-house or outside counsel who got it into this mess, I suspect that Eaton is hearing a self-preserving and incorrect different tune.
In addition, the Supreme Court will be free to write an opinion discussing the entire record before Judge Yerger—not just the examples of misconduct that Judge Yerger cited. That means that things could get even worse for Eaton on appeal. Judge Yerger issued a thorough and well written opinion. But writing opinions is much more of a core function of appellate courts than trial courts. So Eaton's appeal could result in an even more damning opinion from a higher court.
At this point I am waiting to see if Eaton shows signs of a new plan. They sure need one.
We can hope that the appeal results in the entire record being made public. I think that the interests of justice demand a full airing of this affair. Sealing the record prior to a decision by the Circuit Court was arguably justified; sealing the record on appeal is not. The facts are in. As a British jurist observed long ago: "Justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done."
When the MSSC seals a case they don't play around. I had an appeal with the record under seal, and they wouldn't even post the docket entries ("brief for appellants submitted," etc.) online, which was both silly and annoying. I sure hope they don't pull that crap with Eaton, tho the risk of shame for former justices may lead them to do so.
Anderson, I agree totally that the record should be unsealed; all of the documents, including the special master's report, should be available to the public. The integrity of our states judicial process is at stake (again) and the public deserves no less. If justices get exposed with their hands in the cookie jar in the process, so be it. It only took a few days for Larry Latham to smell a rat and get out. The fact that the justices stayed at the dance too long is their problem, not the Court's. The public has a right and a need to know that no one, no one is above the law and no one can or is allowed to hide behind the robes of the court to "save face" or reputation.