As Mississippi pursues a civil lawsuit against Hall of Fame quarterback Brett Favre regarding the alleged misappropriation of federal welfare funds, one of the questions is whether and to what extent the respective lawyers will cooperate with each other, or whether they will play hardball.
Favre’s lawyers seem to be playing hardball.
A.J. Perez of FrontOfficeSports.com reports that the lawyers representing the Mississippi Department of Human Services have filed a motion to compel the production of materials that Favre has refused to produce. He has, per the report, raised objections to 27 different categories of document requests, including text messages and emails Favre might have exchanged with others who were part of an alleged scheme to misuse millions in federal welfare dollars.
Every party in every piece of civil litigation has the right to make good-faith objections to any and all requests for information. The remedy for the party that wants the information is to seek a motion to compel from the court.
But here’s the catch, as a practical matter. If the party refusing to produce the information is simply trying to be difficult, that will potentially piss off the judge. Which potentially will color the judge’s view of the recalcitrant party’s entire case.
Favre’s lawyers have dubbed efforts to examine his tax records “overly broad, unduly burdensome and harassing.” Those are very common buzzwords in civil litigation, where two parties don’t particularly like each other and thus won’t particularly be inclined to play nice on matters that could, and in many cases should, be resolved through fair and reasonable dialogue.
Most jurisdictions require the parties to attempt to resolve any disputes regarding so-called discovery requests before getting the court involved. But if one side is determined to fight, the court will end up being involved — and a ruling will be issued on whether the information must be provided.
Favre has denied all wrongdoing, and he has not been criminally charged.
