Trial lawyers have been laying golden eggs for state

Published 11:00 pm Saturday, June 2, 2012

OXFORD — To borrow funny lady Joan Rivers’ famous line, “Can we talk?”

Mississippi’s new “sunshine law” is not what it’s advertised to be. It’s not about allowing citizens to learn more about what public officials are doing. It’s about trying to curb the enthusiasm of Attorney General Jim Hood in signing contracts with private attorneys to file suits on Mississippi’s behalf.

As the only Democrat elected to statewide office, Hood said he expected no less than a flat-out assault by the Legislature. In May, Gov. Phil Bryant signed the culmination of Round One. The new law, among other things, requires full disclosure of contract terms and a degree of vetting of attorneys. Some sunshine. But mostly rain on Hood’s parade.

Email newsletter signup

Sign up for The Vicksburg Post's free newsletters

Check which newsletters you would like to receive
  • Vicksburg News: Sent daily at 5 am
  • Vicksburg Sports: Sent daily at 10 am
  • Vicksburg Living: Sent on 15th of each month

Nobody likes trial lawyers, right? Ambulance chasers. That’s what they are. So flushing them out into the open is a good thing, right?

Well, except for the fact that their efforts have ginned up hundreds of millions of dollars for the public treasury in this, the poorest state in the union.

It all started when former Attorney General Mike Moore, also a Democrat, up and filed suit against Big Tobacco 20 years ago. Kirk Fordice, Mississippi’s first Republican governor in more than a century, was apoplectic. He immediately asked the state Supreme Court to shut down Moore’s case, insisting that the governor or the Legislature or someone else had to approve before the people’s name could be signed to a lawsuit for damages. Nope, the justices said. As the chief legal officer, Moore was perfectly within his authority to go it alone.

Now what stunk the case up more than an overflowing ashtray was Moore’s alliance with corporation-suing zealot Richard “Dickie” Scruggs, now serving time in a separate case. It happened that Scruggs was Moore’s mentor and his No. 1 campaign contributor. Scruggs and company were secretive about their take in the case, using pretty standard lawyer techniques to mask their fees (estimated at $1 billion or so) and collecting them over time.

But aside from the stench is that Big Tobacco (through its customers) is paying the state Big Money to offset Medicaid and other state expenses in treating people with tobacco-related illnesses.

Over 25 years, payments are expected to total $3.6 billion. The 2011 payment was $113 million. Eventually, the payments may total. Compare that to state revenue from casinos, which was $150 million during the same period. It’s not a pittance.

No case since Big Tobacco has generated that kind of money, but there have been several — some smellier than others — and each has plopped millions into the state’s bank account at opportune times.

As for Hood, his position is that the state doesn’t have the financial depth or staff to press years-long complicated tort cases and, further, that the people need an advocate against companies that exploit taxpayers. Further, he says, and it’s true, that he has been transparent on the fee arrangements he has made with “outside” lawyers. So the “sunshine law” is really about reducing his authority, which, remember, a former Supreme Court said, is fairly solid.

The current Supreme Court, looking at former deals in which settlements have required losing defendants to pay attorneys directly rather than having the funds flow through state channel is improper and that all the cash should flow through state accounts — but that’s not a game changer.

It should also be pointed out that when it comes to government openness, Bryant, throughout his career in public service, has been all for sunshine. He has walked the walk for public access to meetings and records, even when his supporters in city halls and county courthouses would have preferred otherwise.

Ah, yes, the moral issue. Is it better for a state to be “business-friendly” or “money hungry?” It’s a nice question, but remember states have the power to take the property of a widow and her little children if she doesn’t pay her taxes. Governments may claim to have a conscience, but state laws don’t.

We could use more sunshine in Mississippi government, but this new law is about trying to make the attorney general kneel before the throne of big business and shut down suits by trial lawyers.

Wonder what will replace the revenue those lawsuits have been providing?

Charlie Mitchell is a Mississippi journalist. Write to him at Box 1, University, MS 38677, or e-mail cmitchell43@yahoo.com.