Mississippi Supreme Court Removes Judge Bowen from $322 Million Verdict Case--Where Does Case Go From Here?
As widely reported, the Mississippi Supreme Court ordered Judge Eddie Bowen to recuse himself in the Smith County asbestos drilling mud case that was tried to a $322 million verdict in May. In June the defendant Union Carbide moved for Judge Bowen's recusal in the case because his father sued Union Carbide 20 years ago and settled the case. Judge Bowen and the plaintiffs opposed the motion.
The Mississippi Supreme Court's hand-down list on Thursday included the following unanimous ruling:
In Re: Union Carbide Corporation, et al.; Smith Circuit Court; LC Case #: 2006-196; Ruling Date: 05/19/2011; Ruling Judge: Eddie Bowen; Disposition: Union Carbide's Petition for Disqualification of Trial Judge Pursuant to M.R.A.P. 48B, for an Immediate Stay of All Proceedings, and for Other Extraordinary Relief is granted. Judge Eddie H. Bowen shall immediately recuse himself from further proceedings in Smith County Circuit Court Cause No. 2006-196, and all matters pending therein shall continue to be stayed until such time as a judge is appointed to preside. To Grant: Waller, C.J., Carlson and Dickinson, P.JJ., Lamar, Kitchens and Chandler, JJ. Not Participating: Randolph, Pierce and King, JJ. Order entered.
Anderson links the actual order in the comments.
My Take:
I miss Judge Evans.
This case is a mess. $322 million for a single plaintiff case in a venue that—let's be honest—is funny. As in 'odd' funny. The chances of that verdict holding up on appeal are exactly 0.
A new judge will be appointed by the Supreme Court. That judge will presumably order a new trial or significantly reduce the verdict. Then they may all get to go back down to Raleigh for another trial with Gene Tullos and a Smith County jury. Where Union Carbide will once again be a big underdog.
Beyond the hand-down list, the court's order gave some explanation of why the recusal was required.
Worth a look, particularly for judges who want some hints on how not to be ordered off a case.
We've got way too many crappy judges. Right now I'm waiting for a ruling from a judge that will basically say that it's ok to represent a defendant in a criminal case wherein he's accused of assaulting a cop and represent the cop in his post-divorce contempt case AT THE SAME TIME. I suppose he could rule, correctly, that that is a non-waivable conflict but I doubt it.
Why do lawyers whine? Get the bad judges reversed. Obviously incorrect rulings are an opportunity to score an appellate victory. Seize the opportunity.
Lawyers whine because they're people, and people whine.
But "get it reversed" is not a panacea. It wastes time (lots of time) and money. And the standard of review doesn't always allow bad decisions to be reversed. Besides which, bad judges are not confined to the trial bench.
This lengthy and no doubt extremely expensive exercise really should have been avoided, especially when you read the order. Talk about a "no brainer." More importantly, I miss Judge Evans too -- great judge, awesome man!
I'll be losing more money if I have to appeal. My client paid me a tiny bit in the beginning but it was not enough given all the work I've had to do and it's not like he has any more. And the judge has already ruled he can't appeal IFP. But, apparently there are a lot of lawyers out there that need an opinion to tell them not to represent the complainant and the defendant at the same time. Although it's been fairly obvious to every non-lawyer I've told this story to.