Oliver Diaz
From Judgepedia
Oliver E. Diaz, Jr. is a Presiding Justice on the Mississippi Supreme Court, District 2, Place 2. He was appointed to the court in 2000 by a Democratic governor. Diaz faces an election challenge in November 2008 from Paul Newton and Bubba Pierce.
Contents |
Legal Education and Experience
Justice Diaz graduated from Notre Dame High School in 1977, and received a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of South Alabama in 1982. After graduation from the University of Mississippi School of Law in 1985, he practiced law on the Gulf Coast.
Justice Diaz served in the Mississippi House of Representatives from District 116 representing Biloxi and D'Iberville for seven years from 1988 to 1994. During his tenure in the Legislature, he was a subcommittee Chairman for the Insurance Committee and for the Judiciary Committee. He was on the Ways and Means Committee and was Secretary for the Constitution Committee. He also served as City Attorney for the City of D'Iberville for four years.
Justice Diaz was elected to the Mississippi Court of Appeals in November 1994 and served in that position until March 2000, at which time he was appointed to the Supreme Court by Governor Ronnie Musgrove. In 2000, he was elected to the Supreme Court for an eight year term beginning January 2001.
Political Affiliation and Campaign Contributions
Democrat.
2008 Campaign
Diaz and Pierce address crowd
Diaz and his challenger, Chancery Judge Randy Pierce, took questions from members of the American Inns of Court at a September luncheon; both candidates stressed how their legal experiences would shape their presences on the court. Diaz cited his 14 years of appellate court experience, and Diaz stressed his common man background. "I love people. That's my talent. It's dealing with people."
Candidates differed on reforms to the Mississippi judiciary. Diaz said he worried about the public perception that the court favors big business and "Pierce served on the House committee that helped craft changes to Mississippi's judicial system designed to limit financial awards in personal injury lawsuits." He noted that changes made keep pharmacists from being sued in a county they never wrote prescriptions.[1]
Notable Rulings
The money behind a decision
On Oct. 2, the Mississippi Supreme Court overturned, with a 7-2 decision on Stewart v. Prudential, a 2006 Hinds County Circuit Court jury award of $36.4 million against Prudential Insurance. In a dissenting opinion, Justices James Graves and Oliver Diaz said that the case had been decided properly by the jury that heard the case. The case involved Dr. Edsel Stewart, a McComb ob-gyn, who purchased a $1 million life insurance policy from Prudential and wrote out a check for $20,000 to put the policy in effect. Sadly, Stewart had a stroke the following day and died about a month later. When his family attempted to collect on the insurance, Prudential refused to honor the policy. It was Prudential’s position that the policy was never officially approved, even though the company had reviewed Stewart’s medical history, provided him with an annual fee quote and accepted his check. A Hinds County jury listened to both sides and ruled in the Stewarts’ favor, adding more than $35 million in punitive damages. Juries make large awards like that in situations in which they feel a defendant in a civil proceeding has behaved badly. It is the only legal means that ordinary citizens have to punish corporate lawbreakers. In Mississippi, juries traditionally determine the facts of a case. Appellate courts have overturned juries in instances when the judge gave improper instructions to the jury, or when there are proven allegations of wrongdoing among jury members, but never because the court simply disagrees with the verdict.
Justice Jess Dickinson, who voted to reverse the $35 million against Prudential, took more than $1 million in 2002 from various insurance companies, physicians and lawyers, including the law firm that represented Prudential. Presiding Justice William Waller, who also voted for Prudential, took in $357,799 during 2004 from lawyers, physicians and insurance companies, including American Bankers Insurance a company that lists Prudential as its “premier partner”. Also taking in hundreds of thousands of dollars were Chief Justice James Smith ($316,077), Justice Mike Randolph ($585,417) and Justice George Carlson ($276,275).[2]
Diaz: A special-interest punching bag?
Interview: Diaz believes Bush US Attorney targeted him, family, supporters
Mississippi Supreme Court Justice Oliver Diaz was indicted in 2003 on charges relating to his receipt of a loan guarantee from trial lawyer Paul Minor - a personal friend and the largest Democratic donor in Mississippi - to help defray campaign debts. A Bush-appointed US Attorney, Dunnica Lampton, brought charges of bribery against Diaz, Minor and two other Mississippi judges. Diaz was acquitted of all those charges. Within days of his acquittal, Diaz was indicted for a second time, and again acquitted. "After I was indicted and before my trial, my home was also broken into," recalls Diaz. "Our door was kicked in and our documents were rummaged. Televisions, computers and other valuables were not taken, despite the fact that we were out of town for several days and the home was left open by the burglars. We could not figure out a motive for the burglary and reported it to the Biloxi Police Department. The crime was never solved."[3]
Corporate interests target Diaz?
Justice Oliver Diaz, Jr.: In 2002 I was in the second year of an eight-year term on the Mississippi Supreme Court. A struggle was brewing over control of the court. In the 2000 election, large amounts of money were put into Mississippi judicial elections by big business,tobacco and insurance, with mixed results. I was targeted for defeat by these groups, who were not able to beat me in the election.
Huffington Post's Larisa Alexandrovna: When you say "targeted" by these groups, through what mechanism?
OD: The mechanism used by these groups to target me for defeat was the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The U.S. Chamber spent more than a million dollars in the final two weeks before my election, running television and radio ads, direct mail, telephone solicitations and leaflets and flyers. Most of the ads were what you would call negative attack ads directed at me. They also ran a few ads that praised my opponent.
OD: [After the first trial,] in August of 2005 I was fully acquitted. However, three days after my acquittal, Lampton unsealed another indictment against me. This time the charges were tax evasion. The new prosecution theory was that if I had not been bribed then I did not properly disclose the campaign loan proceeds guaranteed by Mr. Minor on my tax returns. This charge too was a stretch. The problem the prosecutors had was that all of the loan proceeds were indeed spent on my election campaign. It was difficult for prosecutors to argue that campaign loans should have been listed as personal income. If they were to prevail on this theory then every politician in this country could be indicted for tax evasion. Anyway, I went to trial a second time in March 2006. After a week-long trial, I was again fully acquitted after the jury deliberated for about fifteen minutes.
Business and Industry Political Education Committee scores Judges
Judges and judicial candidates are discouraged by Mississippi judicial conduct codes from expressing their individual philosophies on almost all issues. The Business and Industry Political Education Committee (BIPEC) commissioned The Economic Judicial Report (EJR) in order to fill this void of information and give voters a meaningful measuring device for assessing how Mississippi's Supreme Courts and Court of Appeals rule. Specifically, BIPEC's concern is "liability"--as the Committee believes that the public is increasingly more vulnerable to being sued. That, "the fundamental premise behind the evaluations is that the enormous expansion of civil liability in American courts over the past 45 years discourages job growth and changes for the worse how we conduct our personal and professional lives."[4]
Kay Cobb is scored highest with 82%, and Judge George Carlson is scored second highest with a rating of 75%. James Smith was scored with 72%, William Waller with 69%, and Craig Sorrell Pittman with 85%. Those scoring under 50% are James Graves (34%), Oliver Diaz (28%), Charles Easley (27%), and Chuck McRae (8%). To learn more, or read this study, visit BIPEC's Economic Judicial Report
See Also
External links
- Biography of Oliver Diaz
- Diaz says false charges shaped him as a judge
- Justice in Mississippi, Harper's Magazine, September, 2007.
- Should corporations seek across-the-board recusals from Diaz?
- The Huffington Post
- NNBD
- Project Vote Smart
- New York Times
- Harper's Magazine
- Mississippi Supreme Court Election Information
- Law Blog mentions Diaz
- Campaign Finance Reports
- http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/03/oliver-diaz-jr/ Oliver E. Diaz, Jr. The Agitator]
