I blogged earlier this week about this case and thought about it some more. This case has kept pounding in my head like several incessant jackhammers on concrete. No wait, that would be the actual incessant jackhammers that construction crews are using outside my office building as they rip up the street, again and again, to put in yet another light-rail line. Nevertheless, this case has troubled me, so I read it again. And this further reading, I regret to report, has raised more questions than answers. Here's a pdf of the case if you care to follow along. As I mentioned, for some reason the briefing in this case on the court's CM/ECF electronic system is not accessible, which is contrary to the dictates of Congress. So I am unable to review the arguments the parties made, I hav
Related Headlines
-
Scruggs to be arraigned November 20
posted 41 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- Scruggs to be arraigned November 20posted 41 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- California U.S. District Court says Katrina storm surge is not excluded by excess policy's flood exclusionposted 52 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
First party property causation, New England style
posted 24 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Judge Acker hammers Scruggs, Rigsby sisters for contempt
posted 12 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Scruggs Nation, Day 22: the Renfroe v. Rigsby disqualification motion
posted 36 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Second Update on State Farm v. Hood hearing: Hood speaks
posted 29 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- State Farm sues Mississippi AG Hoodposted 43 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Rigsby sisters' D.C. attorneys withdraw from Renfroe case, cite lack of ability to pay
posted 23 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog