Except that in this deposition from November 20 Kerri Rigsby herself agreed she had stolen the documents — or at least, neither she nor her lawyer quarreled with that description. The Keker comments and the Law Blog post are also discussed on this blog sponsored by the Carnegie Legal Reporting @ Newhouse — which I’ve read before and which is a pretty decent site.
I’m not sure of the ethics of it, myself. I mean, in one way, I’ve come to expect that a great many lawyers will spew gushers of malarkey and tommyrot in the face of the most obvious contradictions and without regard for either what the truth is or whether they are making total jackasses out of themselves. Doesn’t necessarily make it right, but I’ve never seen anyone do anything about it, either. But even though it’s a losing battle, I’m glad the Law Blog is taking a look at this.
— I appreciate the link from George Wallace at Declarations and Exclusions, but I am sorry to hear that my own blogging would lead to a lessening of anyone else’s output. There are a lot of people who try to sell lawyers on blogging for various reasons, attracting new clients, building reputation, increased brand recognition. And I say, sure, all that is true, if you do it right, but underlying all that, at the very heart of the matter, what it is about for me is freedom, freedom to break out of the insufferable banality of calcified prose and that lawyerish fake persona that robs you of your humanity. Blogging for me is liberation, the ability to cast off the shackles placed by dead hands and soar through the sky — even without my own private plane! As I wrote in the LexisNexis Insurance Law Center post George links to: Legal bloggers of the world unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains.
— I see NMC at folo came up with some pretty decent answers to the 10 unanswered Scruggs questions I posed yesterday.
Insurance Coverage Blog