Updated as described below There’s more news than I noted. Later, I am going to try to work this into a longer post about what went on in the Wilson case.
Earlier today, Lotus linked to new pleadings filed in various Wilson-related cases. We have:
- An order from Judge Carey-McCray ruling against Scruggs on statute of limitations defense in the case where Merkel and Cocke are suing Scruggs for malicious prosecution.
Scruggs had sued Merkel and Cocke essentially to punish them for suing him in the Luckey v. Scruggs case. After years of litigation, Merkel and Cocke were able to defeat that suit, and in turn sued Scruggs for the trouble. Judge Carey-McCray is saying their suit can go forward.
- The next salvo in Roberts Wilson’s suit against Scruggs, a Motion for Sanctions by Wilson for the scheme to illegally influence Judge DeLaughter.
What’s new in this motion is a large fleshing out of the details about how the conspiracy operated– that when the Scruggs lawyers wanted to get a message to Judge DeLaughter, they would meet with Peters in the morning before Peters had lunch with the judge; they’d meet after lunch when messages came the other way. The conspiracy even worked down to details like scheduling– a scheduling order that purportedly came from Judge DeLaughter was actually based on what Scruggs and his lawyers wanted.
There’s also a lot of context-setting that you can get from reading the motion’s description of how the conspiracy worked in conjunction with the orders that Judge DeLaughter was entering. For instance, Judge DeLaughter entered a partial summary judgment order (exhibit 9 in the exhibits to the motion for sanctions) that concludes “perhaps the… matters discussed above will give both parties ‘food for thought,’ for meaningful, good faith settlement discussions….”At the same time, as the settlement conference approached, the judge gave the Scruggs side the confidential settlement memorandum from the Wilson side– a document that each side sends the court (well, the court in this instance because the judge was apparently mediating the settlement discussion) to assess strengths and weakness of their case.
There’s also allegations with information not tied to exhibits. There’s reference to Judge DeLaughter’s statement that he did not know whether he was improperly influenced. It’s mentioned that as late as July, Judge DeLaughter was convinced he was going to get the federal judge position. The description of how information was passed back and forth and about the scheduling motion and other aspects of the conspiracy involving Judge DeLaughter has not been stated in prior testimony.
The Wilson v. Scruggs case was under seal at one time (although it is no longer under seal), and the F.B.I. has the microfiche of the pleadings, presumably in relation to their investigation of Judge DeLaughter. What we have now in these exhibits is a collection of the orders in which Judge DeLaughter gradually whittled away Roberts Wilson’s claims. This complete set of those orders has not yet seen the light of day.
- Exhibit 8 (which I’ve seen before) is the the infamous “quantification” order, the one where Judge DeLaughter says he is holding “a bench trial, so to speak” although he’s never heard a witness (and doesn’t even have an affidavit from the Scruggs expert).
This order was described on this blog in this post.
- Exhibit 9 is an order on summary judgment in Wilson v. Scruggs that has not previously surfaced, although it’s been mentioned.
There are two remarkable parts that I’ve noticed.
First, recall that the Luckey case had been transfered to the federal courts in Mississippi, where it was tried by Magistrate Judge Davis. Scruggs had attempted to insist on a closed, confidential trial. Judge Davis insisted on a normal, open-court federal court trial with a public order (an order still to be found on Pacer). In their summary judgment papers, Wilson’s lawyers cited Judge Davis’s Luckey opinion. Scruggs responded that this was a sanctionable breach of the confidentiality agreement that Judge Davis had refused to follow. Judge DeLaughter seems to buy right along with that.
Second, there’s a bizarre bit of “reasoning” where Judge DeLaughter notes that his “quantification” order had ruled that Scruggs had owed $6+million that he’d already paid (that is, paid 10+ years after litigation started) and thus there would be no actual damages for the jury and thus no punitive damages.
I knew that the Mississippi Supreme Court had long ago made clear that a late payment would not absolve a party of punitive damages, and so I was really curious to see how Judge DeLaughter “reasoned” his way through this one. The answer? Not very well. Apparently aware of the cases I just mentioned, Judge DeLaughter instead notes that punitive damages must bear a reasonable relation to actual damages, that if there are only incidental actual damages (because Scruggs paid them at the last minute), punitive damages “would be constitutionally restricted…to an amount likewise in the ‘incidental’ range.” This is a parody of legal reasoning.
The order then concludes that although the summary judgment is taken under advisement “perhaps the… matters discussed above will give both parties ‘food for thought,’ for meaningful, good faith settlement discussions….” Judge DeLaughter to Wilson: Time to surrender!
There are five more orders in these exhibits, of similar interest in understanding how Judge DeLaughter dispatched Roberts Wilson’s case, about which more in the coming days.
Updated
The updates are primarily the new stuff in the motion, along with a tweak of the description of why the pleadings in the case are not readily available.
