In what should come as no surprise to those following the E.A. Renfroe v. Cori Rigsby et al. case, there has been yet another dramatic turn of events in the Rigsby sisters' “whistleblower” case that first began soon after Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast in 2005.

For those unfamiliar, the case involved Cori and Kerri Rigsby, two sisters who were claim adjusters for E.A. Renfroe, an independent adjusting firm that serviced State Farm policies. The sisters were accused of stealing confidential documents and sharing them with attorney Richard Scruggs and others in an attempt to prove that the Renfroe and State Farm employed tactics designed to shift hurricane losses from insurers to the government.

At times, however, the case has more closely resembled a daytime soap opera than a lawsuit. There were stolen files. Allegations of backdoor dealings involving a state attorney general. Sisters accused of greed. Political grandstanding by elected officials. A plaintiff's attorney convicted of bribing a judge.

Yesterday, however, U.S. District Judge William Acker, Jr., made perhaps the most dramatic move yet by awarding partial summary judgment to E.A. Renfroe and declaring that the Rigsbys had breached their confidentiality agreement with the company. By doing so, Judge Acker all but stated that a jury given the same evidence presented to him could only decide the case one way — for Renfroe.

“The simple and straightforward facts relevant to the breach-of-contract claim are (1) that there was a binding contract between the parties; (2) that the contract included a provision that expressly precluded the Rigsbys from sharing Renfroe's confidential materials with outsiders; and (3) that the Rigsbys, as Renfroe's employees, flagrantly violated the agreement by stealing and sharing confidential documents,” wrote Judge Acker, in his 10-page memorandum opinion.

Later, Acker continued by writing, “Whether Renfroe can recover from the Rigsbys their ill-gotten gains in the form of the substantial consulting fees received from [Richard] Scruggs need not be determined today. At this juncture, the only question is, 'Was there a breach of contract that potentially caused Renfroe compensable damage?' The answer to this question is 'Yes,' meaning that Renfroe is entitled to summary judgment on the simple question of liability by the Rigsbys for breach of contract.”

The summary judgment means the sisters will face a trial with the sole purpose of determining damages. The trial has been scheduled for Jan. 9, 2009.

Additionally, in a minor defeat for Renfroe, Judge Acker ruled against summary judgment in the second part of the motion, which accused the sisters of violating the Alabama Trade Secrets Act. Although redundant to the breach-of-contract claim, a favorable ruling would have made it possible for Renfroe to recover not only actual damages but disgorgement, attorneys' fees, and exemplary damages if the violation was deemed willful and malicious.

To read Judge Acker's entire opinion click here, provided courtesy of blog site Y'all Politics.

Interested in more legal news and in-depth articles? Head over to Claims' legal channel for more information.

Special Reports /

Renfroe Awarded Summary Judgment Over Rigsbys

Related Stories

Recommended For You