The Clarion-Ledger website contains the A.P. story on the $2.1 million verdict against Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. that I discussed in an earlier post. While the AP correctly stated the facts of the case, it misstated the ruling of the Mississippi Court of Appeals.

The statement that I have trouble with is the following:

The young men’s families — and a jury — blamed the accident on a faulty tire on the Chevrolet Camaro rather than excessive speed and the beer the men had been drinking.

The Mississippi Court of Appeals agreed this week and upheld a $2.1 million verdict against Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. and Big 10 Tire Co.

The Court of Appeals neither agreed nor disagreed with the jury’s verdict. Instead, the Court considered the issues raised on appeal by Goodyear and found that there was no reversible error. The Court was required by law to give deference to the jury’s decision and could only reverse if there was no evidence to support the prevailing party and reasonable jurors could not have ruled in the prevailing parties’ favor. Since the jury found for the plaintiffs, the Court was required to consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs. Applying this standard, the Court found that the jury’s decision was supported by sufficient credible evidence to support the verdict.

The Court could not and did not simply read the trial transcript and decide whether the Court thought that the jury got it right. Appellate judges do not substitute their assessment of the evidence for the jury’s assessment. The Court’s fifty-six page opinion cited substantial evidence that supported the jury’s verdict. If the Court had found reversible error, it likely would have been related to jury instructions or other procedural rulings by the trial court. This would have resulted in a new trial, not a judgment in favor of Goodyear. It would be nice to see the news media recognize this important distinction.

The Supreme Court issued a one sentence order today dismissing the appeal of an $80 million punitive damages verdict in a tobacco case against Philip Morris. There are stories on the decision here and here. The plaintiff’s actual damages were $800,000.

Business interests hoped that the Court would use the case to set a firm limit on punitive damages. The Court did not, however, apparently accepting the Oregon Supreme Court’s finding that Philip Morris’ conduct was “extraordinarily reprehensible.”

The practical effect of the ruling is that it will weaken defense arguments that punitive damages are limited to a single digit ratio compared to the plaintiff’s actual damages. Here, the actual-punitive ratio was about 100 to 1. This makes it hard for a defendant in a case with a modest actual damages award to argue that its punitive exposure is capped no matter how bad its conduct was. I like the flexibility that the decision leaves courts to evaluate punitive damages awards.

I have reviewed several blogs discussing the U.S. Supreme Court’s new drug preemption opinion in Wyeth v. Levine. My favorite is at the WSJ blog. Their analysis of the decision is concise and not slanted towards either side.

Whatever Mississippi Public Safety Director Steve Simpson did to the guys at folo, it didn’t justify a post with this picture in it. I’m not sure who the competition was for King of the Biloxi St. Patrick’s Day parade, but there can’t be too many people willing to wear that outfit. I guess all the leprechaun suits were already rented out.

Why am I writing about this? Because Steve Simpson is rumored to be a possible 2010 challenger to the Supreme Court seat currently held by Justice Dickinson. Simpson is a former Circuit Court judge in Harrison County. I’m not sure locking up the Irish vote will command the respect on the Coast that it would in someplace like Boston.

According to an article in today’s Washington Post, the Obama administration will intentionally proceed slowly in appointing new U.S. attorneys.

Advisers to Obama say they have learned from past mistakes, including Clinton’s decision to require all U.S. attorneys to submit their resignations.

Critics said that move threw law enforcement efforts into disarray.

The issue is different in Mississippi than in some places. In Mississippi, both U.S. attorneys resigned and the positions are being held on an interim basis. In some places the U.S. attorney has not resigned and the Obama administration must decide whether to ask for their resignation. In any event, the U.S. attorney positions are not like open judicial seats where there is no one in the position until it is filled.

The acting U.S. attorneys in Mississippi are experienced and capable of competently holding the position indefinitely. So while there is intrigue and speculation in Mississippi, the issue may not be high on the administration’s priority list.

According to the Neshoba Democrat , Mississippi Democratic Party Chair Jamie Franks identified Jackson attorney Carlton Reeves as the likely appointee for the United States District Judge position formerly held by Judge William Barbour. Judge Barbour still serves on the bench, but has taken senior status. Franks was speaking at a Federalist Society luncheon.

According to Franks, a committee consisting of himself, Rep. Bennie Thompson, Rep. Gene Taylor, Rep. Travis Childers, Attorney General Hood and Speaker Billy McCoy would or already have made recommendations to President Obama for judicial appointments.

Franks said Republicans should remember that the Democrats won, and any federal judge nominees are not going to look like Northern District Court Judges Mike Mills or Sharion Aycock, but more like attorney Carlton Reeves. When asked if Reeves was just a random example, Franks only laughed.

Reeves has been the front runner for the open district judge seat since election day. A graduate of Jackson State and the University of Virginia School of Law, Reeves has experience in the Justice Department and private practice. He is a longtime supporter of Bennie Thompson and is highly respected within the Mississippi Bar, even by individuals who do not agree with his politics. If nominated and confirmed, Reeves would join Bush appointees Dan Jordan and Sul Ozerden as Southern District judges in their early to mid-40’s who could easily serve on the bench for the next twenty-five or thirty years.

On Thursday the Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal had a story about the two vacant U.S. attorney positions in Mississippi. The story named only two potential appointees: Forest attorney Costance Slaughter-Harvey and Oxford attorney Christi McCoy. Booneville attorney Ron Michael has removed his name from consideration.

I thought that Slaughter-Harvey had also removed her name from consideration. Natchez attorney Deborah McDonald is said to be a candidate, as is Jackson attorney Cliff Johnson. It is believed that at least one (and perhaps both) of the appointments will go to a minority attorney. Johnson and McCoy are white. McDonald and Slaughter-Harvey are African-American.

It is unknown when President Obama will make the appointments.

The Mississippi Supreme Court issued two unanimous opinions today in nursing home cases, both ruling for the plaintiffs. In Estate of Guillotte v. Delta Health Group the Court rejected the nursing home’s argument that summary judgment was appropriate because the plaintiff failed to identify the names of the individual care givers who breached the standard of care. The Court’s summary of the testimony against the nursing home filled sixteen pages of the slip opinion. Obviously, there was a lot of evidence of breaches in the standard of care.

The Court was particularly critical of the defense:

Moreover, it does not make sense that a plaintiff’s claim can be defeated on summary judgment just because individual names are not given when there is a significant amount of expert testimony…

The Court affirmed summary judgment on the claims of failure to adequately staff, train and supervise, because of the lack of evidence to support the claim.

The most surprising thing about this case was that the nursing home was able to get the trial court to buy into the argument. This case looks like another example of defendants pushing arguments too far based on the apparent belief that the Court is biased towards corporate interests and will seize any excuse to throw out a case. It will be interesting to see if more similarly weak defense arguments are disposed of by the Court in the coming months.

The second opinion was Byrd v. Beverly Enterprises. In this case a unanimous Court affirmed the trial court’s finding that an arbitration agreement was unenforceable where a representative of the nursing home did not sign the agreement. The Court found that this meant that there was no mutual assent and there was no agreement to arbitrate.

These decisions continue the trend of the Court taking a moderate position, as I pointed out here. It’s still too early to conclude that the Court has swung back to the middle from the far right, as examined by the Mississippi College Law Review, but the signs are encouraging that we may finally have a moderate Court.

A reader of this blog emailed me and suggested that Malcolm Harrison would be a strong candidate in a special election to fill Judge DeLaughter’s seat should the position become open. Harrison is the current county prosecutor, has a solid reputation, lives in the Raymond area (seat of the 2nd judicial district), is African-American and has previously won two county-wide elections. These are strong credentials for the position.

Another suggested possibility to fill the seat was Jackson attorney Melvin Priester. It has been a number of years since any of the Hinds County Circuit Court Judge positions were vacant. A vacancy would no doubt cause a huge amount of political intrigue and jockeying.

There is a shortage of doctors in Natchez and plaintiff lawyers are not getting blamed for it. The Sunday Natchez Democrat contained a story about the physician shortage in Natchez, which also exists in other areas of Mississippi.

The city has only one general surgeon, one urologist and no neurologists.

Natchez Regional’s Vice-President of Medical Affairs Dr. Kenneth Stubbs said many new doctors are less attracted to private practice and want to be part of a large hospital group.

They are looking for guarantees in areas like time spent on-call, salary and patient load.

“And we can’t make a lot of those guarantees,” Stubbs said. “It’s not as easy as saying ‘we need doctors’, we need the right doctors.”

And in Stubbs’ 27-year practice here in Natchez, he has seen doctors come and go.

Stubbs said when he started practice in the early 1980s there were more than 80 doctors practicing in the area, now there are approximately 40.

It’s difficult to fault doctors for liking the model of a big practice group in a city like Jackson. With a large practice group, there are more doctors to share overhead and being on-call nights and weekends. But its a shame that a neat city like Natchez, which has as much charm as Oxford without the gridlock, has trouble attracting physicians.