The latest from Anita Lee is that the Lisanbys want Judge Billy Bridges to have another think about denying them punitive damages against USAA.
“The issue is very important to the Lisanbys and the people on the Coast,” said Don Barrett, their attorney. “Punitive damages act as a deterrent. The whole point is to keep insurance companies from doing the same thing again.” …
Anita reports that Bridges, in ruling that the issue would go to the jury, also said he wanted to look at some case law when he got home (to Rankin County). Doing so apparently changed his mind, and the next news was “no punies, jury released.”
But late Monday afternoon, Team Lisanby filed a motion asking him to reverse himself again and either (a) allow punies or (b) stop the whole show and hold the jury until they can take the issue to the MS Supremes on an emergency basis.
Holding the jury is important, Lisanby attorneys said, because they know the case. Otherwise, if the Supreme Court agrees with the Lisanbys, the case would have to be essentially retried before a new jury, something that would take two weeks. …
Barrett said they are petitioning the state Supreme Court on an emergency basis to save time because his clients are elderly.
The 13-page motion to Judge Bridges gives reasons the court should reconsider punitive damages and points out similar cases in which punitive damages were allowed.
It states Bridges’ decision “flies in the face of the facts proven at trial, and ignores governing Mississippi law.”
Meanwhile, Bridges says he’s mailed in a three-pager to the Jackson County circuit clerk.
“I came back home and spent hours and hours going through cases and then made my decision,” Bridges said Monday. He had no further comment until the written opinion reaches the clerk’s office and is filed. …
“There won’t be a way to hold the jury,” he said. “It’s over, the jury’s discharged.”
Hours and hours? Between Friday afternoon and Saturday morning, not counting driving time, dinner, sleep, breakfast, and maybe a little hygiene? You know that stylish Brazilian gesture of dismissal, flicking the fingertips together twice, “Done”? Here ’tis in a Rankin County accent.
I thought Don Barret was part of the SKG? Is he allowed to be involved in any of the Katrina cases?
Who was it the Admiral said influenced Judge Bridges to deny punitive damages? Did he ever name names, or just leave it hanging out there?
I’ve only seen that one-sentence quote, 3dS.
Barrett and other SKG associates were disqualified from the SKG cases against State Farm, but not cases against other insurers.
The Rigsbys were not fact witnesses against USAA, so the Scruggs payments to them had no effect on this case.
Do you know if Barrett was standing beside the Admiral when he made the accusation?
Anita would have to answer that one for us, 3dS. I had the impression she was interviewing the admiral out of Barrett’s presence, but that’s just a guess.
Will you ask Anita? And if Barret was there, I’d like to know if she noticed if his head bobbed up and down like one of those little dogs you see in automobile rear windows when the Admiral said it.
Unfortunately for the Admiral the case will be appealed. A large punitive damage award might encourage USAA to settle quicker, but they think they have a pretty good case. There is much more than this one case riding on this outcome too.
I would give anything for his cell and home phone records for Friday and Saturday!
3dS at 7, Anita reminds me that she didn’t write that story (she handed Lisanby off to Karen Nelson on her way to Oxford). I’ve asked KN but had no reply yet.
I have vague memories of a Plaintiff’s lawyer in Jackson whose estranged husband turned over phone records to the other side that showed communications during a trial with the judge. Seems like there was even a MSSC case on it when she later sued for invasion of privacy or something to that effect. I do not know if the Lisanby trial judge is married, but if he is going through a divorce, that might be a way his phone records for last weekend could come out, TS at 9.
The question is this:
If USAA paid only for upstairs and roof damage that could not possibly have been caused by flooding, but did not make a serious attempt to determine how much first floor damage was caused by wind before the storm surge and did not even verify the elevation of the house or the height of the storm surge, is it up to the jury or the judge to decide whether that is bad faith deserving of punitive damages?
Researcher, sounds like the judge already made that decision!