Under the Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Award Act of 1976, plaintiffs collect fees if they win even in part, but pay no fees if they lose. That puts a bludgeon in the hands of objectors in church-state lawsuits (as well as in many other kinds of lawsuits characterized as being about civil rights). Rep. John Hostettler of Indiana has introduced the Public Expression of Religion Act, a bill that would attempt to level the playing field as regards claims of religion-related civil rights violations by public officials. It would do so, however, by eliminating fee entitlements entirely; that would indeed deprive long-shot suits of much of their in terrorem effect, but at the cost of undercutting valid claims brought under the act. Why not take a look at moving toward full two-way fee shifting instead? (Christopher Levenick, “High Noon at Sunrise Rock”, WSJ/OpinionJournal.com, May 27).
Archive for May, 2005
Hot beverage temps
Touched on again in Ted’s travelogue (May 25):
Another hot-water datapoint: a television commercial featuring an older British housewife talking about her need for a “cuppa” during the day, and showing off her “space-age kettle.” She then proceeds to set the temperature of her water to 85 Celsius, or 185 degrees Fahrenheit.
ADA filing mills
Seems they’ve now arrived in Sacramento and nearby Solano County: Ron Wilson and Byron Chapman, who say they’re disability rights activists, “together have filed more than 100 ADA lawsuits in Sacramento federal court in just the past four years. In some cases, the lawsuits come without warning.” “The number he quoted to me was $75 an hour, he’ll do the consulting,” said Vacaville businessman Tom Phillippi, of Wilson. “You pay him $75 an hour as a consultant and you won’t necessarily face him in court.” (“Businesses Come Together To Fight Disabled Lawsuit Abuse”, KXTV, Mar. 8). For more, see Mar. 18 and many other posts linked from there.
Crustless wrapup
Cleveland Scene magazine follows up on the reverses suffered by the Smucker company in its efforts to patent the crustless peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwich (Rebecca Meiser, “The Peanut Butter Jam”, Apr. 20)(see Apr. 9, 2005; Jan. 30 and May 1, 2001). On a more serious note, Dennis Crouch of Patent Law Blog has two recent posts on the politics of patent reform in Congress (May 25, May 26).
Aguilar v. Avis, cont’d
Some years back, Justice Janice Rogers Brown of the California Supreme Court wrote a dissent in the widely noted harassment-law case of Aguilar v. Avis, in which the court ordered the drawing up of a list of forbidden words that employees of a rental car franchise were to be prohibited from using to each other on the job even in private conversation (see Sept. 11, 2000). The other day a New York Times editorial (“Disarmament in the Senate”, May 25) assailed Rogers for her supposedly extreme position in dissenting from Aguilar (which was decided 4-3), and James Taranto of the WSJ’s “Best of the Web” quite appropriately rises to her defense (May 27). As Taranto notes (but the Times somehow fails to), Justice Stanley Mosk, regarded as the California high court’s most liberal member, joined Brown in dissenting from Aguilar as a prior restraint on speech rights. For more, see Tim Sandefur, Sept. 23, 2004.
Update: court won’t upset Ford sweetheart verdict
Zavala County, Texas: Judge Amado Abascal of the 365th District Court has refused Ford Motor Company’s request for a new trial in that very curious $31-million-verdict case in which Ford alleges that juror Diana Palacios, city manager of Crystal City, turned out to be romantically involved with one of the plaintiff’s lawyers suing Ford, Jesse Gamez, and even “allegedly helped Gamez sign up three of the victims as clients in the lawsuit against Ford”. Further tidbit from the new coverage: Palacios is said to work as a jury consultant. See Mar. 7, Mar. 22, and, on other issues raised by the case, May 13 and May 16. (Tresa Baldas, “A Small Town’s Big Verdict Leads to Ugly Charges”, National Law Journal, May 27).
“Brand Name Bullies”
Unreviewed, but sounds promising: Brand Name Bullies, by David Bollier (website), published last December, bills itself as an “impassioned, darkly amusing look at how corporations misuse copyright and trademark law to stifle creativity and free speech.” The publisher, John Wiley & Sons, has a website with excerpts. For many examples of that phenomenon, see our pages on intellectual property/technology and free speech/media law.
“South Park Conservatives”
Want to know what destructive craziness the trial lawyers are up to? Legal thinker Walter Olson records every jot and tittle on his constantly updated website Overlawyered.
— from p. 117 of the hit new book South Park Conservatives: The Revolt Against Liberal Media Bias, written by my Manhattan Institute colleague Brian C. Anderson (buy on Amazon).
“Long, pointy knife control”
No, of course it doesn’t stop with guns: The British Medical Journal, which we have had occasion to criticize in the past (see Dec. 17, 2001 and links from there), has run an editorial entitled “Reducing knife crime: We need to ban the sale of long, pointed kitchen knives”. (John Schwartz, “British Medical Experts Campaign for Long, Pointy Knife Control”, New York Times, May 27; Edward Black, “Doctors seek kitchen knife ban”, The Scotsman, May 27). Dave Kopel (May 27) has more. And: Max at Untamed Fire of Freedom comments (May 27).
Enter land with forbidden vehicle, then sue
Via Common Good “Society Watch“, and we can’t do better than to just repeat their description of the case:
The mission of the Earth Conservancy, a non-profit organization in Northeastern Pennsylvania, is to revitalize “16,300 acres of former coal company-owned land. … More than 10,000 acres of Earth Conservancy land has been dedicated to open space and recreational activities.” But the Conservancy now faces a lawsuit from the mother of 30-year-old James Bertrand, who died “when the Jeep in which he was a passenger ran off a dirt roadway, down an embankment and into a 15- to 20-foot-deep waterhole on conservancy property.” The property in question is open to the public, but motorized vehicles are strictly prohibited. Had Bertrand obeyed the rules, says conservancy executive director Mike Dziak, the accident would have been avoided.
(Kasia Kopec, “Woman sues Earth Conservancy over son’s drowning in 2004 four-wheeling accident”, Wilkes-Barre Times-Leader, Mar. 29)