James Graves
From Judgepedia
Contents |
James E. Graves, Jr. is an associate justice of the Mississippi Supreme Court. Justice Graves is married to Dr. Bettye Ramsey Graves; they have three sons. Justice Graves was born in Clinton, Mississippi, where he was the valedictorian of his high school class.[1]
Legal education and experience
Graves holds a B.A. from Millsaps College, in Jackson, Mississippi; a Masters of Public Administration degree from the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, in Sycracuse, New York; and his law degree from Syracuse University College of Law, in Syracuse, New York.
He worked as a staff attorney at Central Mississippi Legal Services. As a special assistant attorney general, he was head of the Human Services Division of the Attorney General's Office. Prior to his appointment as Circuit Judge, he was director of the Division of Child Support Enforcement of the Mississippi Department of Human Services. He was also engaged in the private practice of law for more than three years. His teaching experience includes serving as a teaching team member at Harvard Law School where he taught trial advocacy. He has been a presenter at Stanford Law School on two occasions and was a jurist-in-residence at Syracuse University School of Law. Justice Graves has also served as an adjunct professor at Jackson State University, Tougaloo College, and Millsaps College where he taught media law, civil rights law, and sociology of law.[2]
Judge Graves was appointed by then-governor Ronnie Musgrove, a Democrat, on November 1, 2001 to serve on the Supreme Court, and subsequently was elected by the people in November 2004, representing one of three seats in Mississippi's Judicial District 1. His opponent was Samac Richardson. Since Mississippi's justices serve eight year terms, he will next face re-election in 2012. Justice Graves is currently the only African-American on the nine-member court. He was appointed a Circuit Court Judge in February 1991, and served in that role for 10 years. He was elected to the position in a special election in September 1991, where he received 77% of the votes cast. He was re-elected without opposition in 1994 and 1998. Between 2001 and 2004, Justice Graves wrote sixty-nine majority opinions for the court. He established the first website for a Mississippi trial court, and implemented electronic filing of court documents.[3]
Judicial Philosophy
Awards and associations
The Hinds County Bar Association named Justice Graves the recipient of its Innovation Award in 2000 in recognition of his pioneering efforts in creating the first state-of-the-art high-tech courtroom in Mississippi state courts, in establishing the first court website for a Mississippi state trial court, and in implementing electronic filing of court documents. The National Bar Association awarded him its first Distinguished Jurist Award in 1996. The National Conference of Black Lawyers selected him from among judges nationwide to receive the Judge of the Year Award in 1992. The Millsaps College Black Students Association named Justice Graves the recipient of its Alumnus of the Year Award in 1993. He received the NAACP Legal Award in 2004. Recently, Justice Graves has received two national awards: In 2005, the 100 Black Men Of America named him the recipient of its Equal Justice Award; and in 2006, the National Conference of Black Mayors gave him the President's Award. Both awards were in recognition of his efforts in giving back to his community, in serving the citizens of the State of Mississippi and in serving as a role model and mentor for youth throughout the nation.[5]
Business organization 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."[6]
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
Political Affiliation and Campaign Contributions
In 2004, James Graves ran as the incumbent for the Mississippi Supreme Court. He raised a total of $727,075. Graves himself contributed $15,000, the largest individual contributor. Lawyers and Lobbyists were the largest contributor by economic interest, giving $509,066, or 70.02% of the total. The second largest contributor in terms of economic interest was Graves, contributing 2.06% of the total, and the third was Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate with $13,100, or 1.80% of the total. For a complete summary of his 2004 campaign contributions, visit Follow the Money: James Graves.
Notable rulings
Stewart v. Prudential decision
On Oct. 2, 2007 the Mississippi Supreme Court overturned, with a 7-2 decision in Prudential v. Stewart (2007), a 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 physician, who purchased a $1 million life insurance policy from Prudential and wrote out a check for $20,000 to the insurance broker. Stewart had a stroke the following day, slipped into a coma, 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 commenced, as there was a "counteroffer" policy prepared, which was never delivered or signed. A Hinds County jury ruled in the Stewarts’ favor, adding more than $35 million in punitive damages.
Journalists were quick to point out that 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. Likewise, Presiding Justice William Waller, who also voted for Prudential, took in $357,799 during 2004 from lawyers, physicians and insurance companies, as did Chief Justice James Smith ($316,077), Justice Mike Randolph ($585,417) and Justice George Carlson ($276,275).[7]
However, several facts from the case reveal these donations to be an obvious post hoc ergo propter hoc error. First, Dr. Stewart's son Larry failed to disclose that his father 1) had a stroke and 2) had fallen into a coma during the period between 9/1/99 (when Dr. Stewart's coma occurred) and when the "counteroffer" policy was completed on 9/17/99 - despite numerous conversations with the broker. Second, contract law dictates that for a valid contract to exist there must be offer, acceptance, and consideration. The "counteroffer" policy (underwritten, notably, absent the material change information withheld by the doctor's son) offered to Dr. Stewart at a slightly higher premium was never accepted because 1) he was in a coma and 2) the policy was never physically delivered for signatures, i.e., never accepted. At trial, Larry Stewart even testified that he "understood that after the issuance of the policy, there was a process for acceptance, which included delivery, to be completed before the policy would be effective."
For the full text of the case, see this link.
NAFTA able to second-guess American judges?
After the highest court in Massachusetts ruled against a Canadian real estate company and after the United State Supreme Court declined to hear its appeal, Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall of the Massachusetts court thought that the company's day in court was over until she learned of yet another layer of judicial review, by an international tribunal. "To say I was surprised to hear that a judgment of this court was being subjected to further review would be an understatement." Tribunals like the one that ruled on the Massachusetts case were created by the North American Free Trade Agreement, and they have heard two challenges to American court judgments. In the other, the tribunal declared a Mississippi court's judgment at odds with international law, leaving the United States government potentially liable for hundreds of millions of dollars. The part of Nafta that created the tribunals, known as Chapter 11, received no consideration when it was passed in 1993. "When we debated Nafta," Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, said in 2002, "not a single word was uttered in discussing Chapter 11. Why? Because we didn't know how this provision would play out. No one really knew just how high the stakes would get."
Any Canadian or Mexican business that contends it has been treated unjustly by the American judicial system can file a similar claim, and vice versa. "This is the biggest threat to United States judicial independence that no one has heard of and even fewer people understand," said John D. Echeverria, a law professor at Georgetown University. In the Massachusetts case, brought by Mondev International, the Nafta tribunal decided in 2002 that the Massachusetts courts had not violated international law. But in a separate pending case, brought by a Canadian company challenging the largest jury verdict in Mississippi history, a different Nafta tribunal delivered a harsh assessment of Mississippi justice--"The whole trial and its resultant verdict were clearly improper and discreditable and cannot be squared with minimum standards of international law and equitable treatment." The Mississippi case arose from an exchange of companies between a Canadian concern, the Loewen Group, and companies owned by a Mississippi family, the O'Keefes. The O'Keefe family, contending that the Loewen Group did not live up to its obligations, sued for breach of contract and fraud. Although the tribunal found that the businesses were worth no more than $8 million, a jury in Jackson, Miss., awarded the family $500 million in 1995. Loewen settled the case the next year, for $175 million. But, arguing that the trial had been unfair and that it had been coerced into settling by a requirement that the company post an appeal bond of $625 million, Loewen and one of its owners filed their claim in the Nafta tribunal in 1998. They asked for $725 million from the United States.
In the Mississippi case, the tribunal had faulted Judge James Graves of Circuit Court in Jackson for allowing lawyers for a Mississippi businessman to make "prejudicial and extravagant" statements to the jury about the Canadian defendants' wealth and nationality. "Judge Graves failed in his duty to take control of the trial by permitting the jury to be exposed to persistent and flagrant appeals to prejudice," the panel wrote. "The conduct of the trial by the trial judge was so flawed that it constituted a miscarriage of justice." Justice Graves, now a justice of the Mississippi Supreme Court, declined to comment.
"There are grave implications here," Chief Justice Ronald George of the California Supreme Court said in an interview. "It's rather shocking that the highest courts of the state and federal governments could have their judgments circumvented by these tribunals."[8]
External links
- James Graves' campaign website
- Biography and resume of Justice James Graves
- Supreme Court justice to speak
- Interview with Justice Graves
- Wikipedia: James E. Graves, Jr.
- State of Mississippi Judiciary: James Graves
- Interview with Jackson Free Press
- New York Times: NAFTA criticizes Graves
- Follow the Money: James Graves
- Graves sentences driver in 2004 car chase
References
| ||||||||
 |
The Mississippi Project on Judgepedia
|
