David Rossmiller, posting from Starkville and the “Insurance Day” being sponsored by Miss. State, is speculating about the insurance commission’s “Market Study” about State Farm’s conduct after Katrina. The market study is an investigation of State Farm’s claims handling that has been ongoing for some time– I think almost a year and a half. One would assume given the other attendees, Rossmiller’s speculation is not just drawn from thin air.
He mentions again that the Rigsbys and Scruggs have insisted that they did not meet until February of 2006. Here’s what else he says:
Speaking of the Rigsbys and Scruggs, you will recall how they all have claimed repeatedly that they never spoke prior to his becoming their attorney in February 2006. Often they don’t remember much else, but on that they are certain. (Note, however, that in the recent Cori Rigsby deposition I posted, she did admit for the first time that she accessed the State Farm records using a list of the plaintiffs in Scruggs’ cases, although she wouldn’t admit to Scruggs’ having given it to her for that purpose — and there is some plausibility to this, as crazy as it sounds — after all, she has a history of taking documents without permission)!
What if, however, the reason the Mississippi Department of Insurance’s market conduct survey of State Farm — you remember that, they’ve been working on it for quite some time, to check out State Farm’s conduct in Katrina adjusting — what if the reason this is taking so long is that there is new evidence to check out about whether the stories hold up about when Scruggs and the Rigsbys first met? And possibly about Hood’s role and when it began?
What if? Remember, Scruggs and the Rigsbys have made a lot of people mad, and people talk, and give up all kinds of information about when meetings took place and where. Remember that Scruggs, according to the Lee Harrell deposition I have linked to so many times, said in December 2005 he had State Farm “insiders” at that time — but under oath, he and the Rigsbys said February 2006. Wouldn’t it be ironic if this market conduct survey creates more problems for Scruggs, the Rigsbys and Jim Hood than it does for State Farm? But isn’t that the way it goes? Once the center no longer holds, everything flies apart at the margins too.
Interrrrestink, NMC.
But if his “hunch” on the market survey is to be believed, it neeeds better arguing-for than “(Note, however, that in the recent Cori Rigsby deposition I posted, she did admit for the first time that she accessed the State Farm records using a list of the plaintiffs in Scruggs’ cases, although she wouldn’t admit to Scruggs’ having given it to her for that purpose — and there is some plausibility to this, as crazy as it sounds — after all, she has a history of taking documents without permission)!”
Know what I mean?
He states that Scruggs Atty in the Bar complaint was the Bar Atty. I thought NMC said that was the Bar Atty’s son. What’s up?
No, DB, the daddy/former Bar counsel is representing Dickie. His son works for NMC’s brother’s firm.
Dang!
Rossmiller puts too much stock in the Lee Harrell deposition. I don’t believe Mr. Harrell was lying in his deposition, but I believe he put a very negative spin on things. Regarding the 500 million slush fund that Dickie purportedly wanted to control, I have never understood how that would work in the real world. It is much more likely that Dickie was asking Dale for his support in pursuing a class action, on which Dickie would be lead counsel. So Harrell is telling the truth, he’s just making it sound like something sinister. No attorney, no matter how egocentric or deluded, would think that State Farm would just say: “OK here Dickie, because George Dale told us to pay you this, go spread around this 500 million as you see fit.”
I wonder if belle has assaulted Rossmiller yet.
rogerwilco, I agree that he puts too much stock in that deposition. I don’t think it’s as clear-cut as it’s presented, and wonder why we haven’t seen more (testimony from other people at the meeting, documents, etc.).
The reason I thought his post was worth repeating is that I know that the elusive “market study” has been something being talked about in the various Katrina depositions a fair amount. I doubt if anyone other than relatively close readers had picked up on it, and I suspected that Rossmiller was telling us he has reason to believe it’s about to come out and that it won’t be helpful to the SKG side. Of course, given the history, the insurance commissioner clearly has a side in this, too, but it still could be interested. But I thought this a good way to give readers a heads up about the market study and give them one perspective about what it might contain.
Jane, it appears we are going to have to depend on wire stories and the like. No folo-ers at the cow college.
It is a sad thing that Rossmiller’s first on-the-ground experience in Miss is in Starkville.
Starkville + dining = oxymoron.
You can get a decent lunch at the cafe downtown, but I agree with DN.
Y’all are a bunch of Ole Miss snobs, it appears. Go Bulldogs!
(channeling jim for zennie) YEAH!
Commissioner Chaney spoke openly of the market conduct exam on March 4 at his Insurance Forum in Gulfport. He said then the results would be out in around 6 weeks. I did not see Mr Rossmiller in attendance but it is very possible he is corresponding with Lee Harrell. He indicated it would contain some surprising findings.
Since the exam focuses on State Farm’s claims handling here post Katrina handling I do not see the point in dragging Qui Tam plantiffs Cori and Kerri Rigsby into that equation but to the extent Zach Scruggs embarrassed Lee Harrell in the first deposition that Mr Rossmiller never speaks of, I could see Mr Harrell’s incentive to grind an axe against Scruggs and the Rigsby’s.
However unlike Mr Harrell’s previous boss, Commissioner Chaney has assured me personally and publicly to the crowds gathered on both February 29, 2008 and March 4, 2008 that his focus is completely consumer oriented. In that light I’m not certain he’d allow Mr Harrell to wander off track too much indulging old grudges involving cases in litigation.
Insurance companies and their representatives trashing their insureds turned plaintiffs is nothing new. In theWeiss case, Allstate accused them of fraud shortly before the jury returned a $2.8 million dollar verdict against them for an extraordinary display of bad faith in how their Katrina claim was adjusted. Richard Trahant, the Weiss’ attorney, made clear his thoughts on the case analysis both on Mr Rossmiller’s blog after the verdict and most recently on mine today including a fascinating observation on the number of wind-water cases in Louisiana that have actually made it to a jury.
sop
Thanks for the update sop. We all are interested in seeing the market report…
And I’d noticed that the only Harrell deposition we hear about is the second one. On my over-long thing to do list was wanting to read a copy of the first one. I didn’t think it reasonable to post about Part II without reading Part I.
Anthony’s in West Point is the best place to eat in the Golden Triangle (Columbus, West Point, Starkville).
Catfish, crab cakes, steaks served in a casual atmosphere and a live band the first Sat.nite of the month.
NMC, I have always thought your view on the Harrell testimony was appropriately measured. Rossmiller treats it like it came down to us on tablets. My view is that Harrell had an ax to grind in Part II, and was rehearsed with the State Farm lawyers to a degree that was obvious. Like I said, I don’t think he was lying, but everything was spun.
Harrell’s statement does not sound right. Scruggs would not be suggesting a $500 million dollar State Farm settlement fund in December 2005. No Katrina cases had been decided. State Farm was still getting away with denying claims based on anticoncurrent causation.
Why would Scruggs talk to Dale about a settlement when not settlement had been discussed with State Farm?
However, in January 2007, the proposed Woullard class settlement agreed to by Scruggs and State Farm was estimated to cost $500 million. State Farm made it contingent on Hood agreeing to drop the criminal case, so Scruggs was whipping up public and political pressure for Hood to relent.
Is Dickie Scruggs so wise that he knew in December 2005 that State Farm would agree to a $500 million settlement 13 months later?
The more likely explanation is that Scruggs did not ask Dale to endorse a $500 million settlement until January 2007 when there actually was a $500 million settlement and Dale’s concurrence was simply a box that needed to be checked before submitting it to Judge Senter.
Something else must have been discussed at the December 2005 meeting. Definitely not a settlement and probably not whistleblowers.
One possible topic: At the time, everyone wanted Dale to get out of his bunker and enforce his bulletins that said that the insurance company, not the homeowner, had the burden to prove the cause of the damage:
http://www.mid.state.ms.us/bulletins/20056bull.pdf
I wish your assesment of Chaney were correct. It is not. Despite what he is saying now it is well known tha he was the insurance industries Plan “B” in the event that George lost his primary fight. He said this repeatedly to people while the primary race was underway between Anderson & Dale. He is their “boy” and will do what he is told to do, which at best is nothing. So far he is exceeding their expectations by doing absolutely nothing while talking about a lot. A true politician but no friend of any policy holders in Mississippi. When Dale left we were paying 4th highest rates in country. By the time Chaney leaves we will be better than that says a good bottle of scotch.
Please delete one of the duplicate comments, and this one. Why did the first one take so long to go through? And where is the edit function?
Researcher, we’re having all kinds of tech weirdness right now, the worst of which is regular commenters hitting the spam filter — in fact, even Jane and NMC did today! I didn’t see you in there, which is why it took so long.
I didn’t know about the Edit button — how long’s that been missing, folks?
NMC and Jane, I’ll be crashing soon, so please check the spam filter often, okay?
Researcher, the aim all along appears to have been a global resolution by a class or other means. It’s quite possible Scruggs could have been talking about a class case in December, 2005. Having said that, my own opinion is that Harrell’s chronology was all wrong. He was in such a rush to get all these damning things on record that he forgot his dates. I would have to go back and read the deposition again, but when I read it the first time I noticed three or four pretty big temporal errors.