Jones v. Scruggs Hearing: Judge Lackey Testifies

Jones v. Scruggs is the state civil suit between the Jones, Funderburg law firm and its former Scruggs Katrina Group partners over disputed legal fees which resulted in the federal bribery charges against Dickie Scruggs and his four co-defendants. A hearing was held in Oxford on Tuesday before state Circuit Court Judge William Coleman on Jones’ motion to sanction all the members of the group and enter a default judgment against the other law firms; Jones is seeking 20% of all past attorney fees from Katrina litigation as well as the firm’s legal fees in this case.

Alyssa Schnugg covers the hearing in the Oxford Eagle here and AP’s coverage is here. But NMC @ folo liveblogged the hearing in six parts beginning here, giving us a much broader picture. Of particular interest is the testimony of Judge Henry Lackey, especially in part 3; these are his first extensive public statements about what happened, and it’s quite apparent from his testimony that he was outraged, referring to Dickie Scruggs as a monster. If Scruggs’ attorney Cal Mayo expected to impeach Lackey’s testimony, he failed badly. And in final arguments (part 6), Mayo ran afoul of Judge Coleman by referring to the bribery as an “ethical lapse” and appearing to argue entrapment. If he was intending to portray his client in a better light, he again failed badly.

Judge Coleman expects to issue a ruling today. His statements on Tuesday indicate that his decision will apply to all defendants.