…results in courtroom commotion in Mississauga, Ont., Canada. (”Boy, 10, sues hockey association over demotion”, CBC News, Jun. 19; “Hockey lawsuit put off until fall”, Mississauga News, Jun. 24). Brendan Butrimas allegedly got booted from the Applewood Hockey Association because of conflicts between his father and officials. His family says the C$10,000 suit is — had you guessed? — Not About The Money. “It’s not a money grab. This is a case to protect the rights of children,” said attorney Harry Kopyto, the family’s legal agent. (”Boy sues over fight between his father and hockey league”, CP/Globe and Mail, Jun. 19). (Corrected Nov. 27 to specify standing of family’s legal agent; a reader writes in to say that Kopyto was disbarred by Ontario legal authorities but “is allowed to appear as an agent/paralegal in Small Claims Court”.)
From the monthly archives:
June 2005
The reality TV show “Trauma: Life in the ER” was filmed at 35 hospitals in 23 states over a five-year period. Now lawyers are pursuing would-be class actions against the New York Times’ television subsidiary, Discovery Communications, and various hospitals claiming that the privacy consent given by patients and family members was defective or obtained under false pretenses. Despite protests from defendants that the issue of validity of consent is intrinsically one that requires case-by-case determination, a New Jersey judge has certified a class action for lawsuits within that state. The judge estimated that the number of potential class members nationwide might reach into the hundreds of thousands. (Charles Toutant, “Hospital Patients Filmed for Reality TV Certified as Plaintiff Class”, New Jersey Law Journal, Jun. 20). Florida Masochist notes (Jun. 24) that a plaintiff’s lawyer suing in Orlando, per the Sentinel coverage, “said the lawsuit doesn’t question the right to broadcast the material, but the filming and production process”. (Pedro Ruz Gutierrez, “Patients sue over TV appearances”, Orlando Sentinel, Jun. 24). That sounds puzzling: if the persons suing aren’t objecting to the broadcast of the material, how seriously were they injured by the alleged affront to their privacy?
Opinions vary among physicians as to the likely usefulness of a new device which indicates whether a patient is awake or asleep during surgery. One thing is certain, however: hospitals’ decisions on whether or not to adopt the new technology will be strongly influenced by the aim of avoiding litigation, as distinct from the device’s perceived medical merits. (Daniel Fisher, “Defensive Medicine”, Forbes, Apr. 25).
In a fairly stunning ruling with far-reaching significance for Indian land claims in the Northeast, a panel of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has thrown out the Cayuga tribe’s lawsuit against New York State and local landowners over possession of 64,000 upstate acres, including the $248 million that a trial court judge had earlier determined was owed to the tribe in damages (see Jun. 24-25, 2002). The majority in the 2-1 opinion, led by Judge Jose Cabranes, relied on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent opinion in City of Sherrill v. Oneida, which disallowed a tribe’s efforts to assert reservation sovereignty over tracts of land it had added piecemeal through purchase to its previous holdings. According to the majority opinion, the Sherrill ruling revitalizes the equitable defense of laches, or undue delay, which many observers had assumed was unavailable to defendants in the Indian land claim suits. In a dissent, Judge Janet Hall agreed that ejectment of current homeowners was now barred by the Supreme Court’s evolving jurisprudence but argued that claims for cash damages should be allowed to go forward.
Should the ruling be upheld following the inevitable petitions for en banc reconsideration, Supreme Court certiorari, etc., it could spell doom for most and perhaps all efforts to revive long-defunct Indian land claims, which have for decades now inflicted injustice and disruption on innocent landowners and others. For our extensive coverage of the issue, see Jun. 27 (Shinnecocks’ Hamptons suit) and many links from there. (Diana Louise Carter, “Judges throw out Cayugas’ land claim”, Rochester Democrat & Chronicle, Jun. 29; Scott Rapp, “Judges To Indians: You’re Too Late To Reclaim Land”, Syracuse Post-Standard, Jun. 29; Jim Adams, “Second Circuit throws out New York state land claim”, Indian Country Today, Jun. 28; William Kates, “Appeals Court Tosses $248M Award to Tribe”, AP/Washington Post, Jun. 28). More: New York Law Journal (& welcome Howard Bashman readers). Update Apr. 14, 2006: U.S. Justice Department petitions for certiorari.
{ 3 comments }
Blissful Knowledge is providing extensive coverage (via Megan McArdle)(see Jun. 26, Jun. 20, etc.).
Okay, so lawyers constantly serve as press sources for coverage critical of the people they litigate against, but still…. After the New York Times reports on a revenue-splitting dispute between Lord of the Rings director Peter Jackson and New Line Cinema (Ross Johnson, “The Lawsuit of the Rings”, Jun. 27), Jack Shafer wonders: “[S]houldn’t there be a Times policy against giving a partisan source, in this case a defense attorney, the cover of anonymity to call the plaintiff in a case against his client piggish?” (”Lord of the Pigs?”, Slate, Jun. 27).
Who says you’ll never get rich working at Wal-Mart? A federal magistrate judge has just approved a $2.8 million award for disability-based discrimination on behalf of plaintiff Patrick Brady, who suffers from cerebral palsy. The company’s offense? It “violated federal and state laws by making a prohibited inquiry [relating to his disabilities] before giving Brady an employment offer. The company also subjected Brady to adverse employment conditions by transferring him from the pharmacy to a more physically taxing position pushing carts in the parking lot, according to the verdict.” The magistrate judge complained bitterly about having to reduce the award from the $7.5 million in damages, including $5 million in punitive damages, originally voted by the jury. On the tendency of stringent liability exposure to discourage employers’ hiring of disabled persons (workplace participation of whom actually went down, not up, after the ADA was passed), see, among other sources, Jul. 11, 2000, and this NBER paper. (Michael Bobelian, “Court Reluctantly Trims Wal-Mart Penalty”, New York Law Journal, Jun. 23).
{ 1 comment }
Tom Kirkendall, and Professors Ribstein, Bainbridge, and Henning on the prospect of charges against unindicted alleged co-conspirator Milberg Weiss (Jun. 27).
Professors Rebecca Tushnet and Eugene Volokh discuss how language in Monday’s Supreme Court Grokster opinion could leak into dramatic ripple effects for other industries and products.
Kevin, MD has a continuing series of real-life tales of defensive medicine.
The June 3 Medical Economics article (and associated ten sneaky lawyer questions by Berkeley Rice is old news to any litigator who’s defended a witness, but laypeople may be surprised how little the process has to do with truth-seeking. (via Newmark and KevinMD)
{ 1 comment }
Our free periodic newsletter went out to subscribers this morning. Each issue summarizes a few weeks’ worth of postings in terse yet wry style. To join the list, change your address, etc., visit this page (requires Google registration).
I’ve got an op-ed in yesterday’s New York Times (in the zoned Long Island weekly edition) on the Shinnecock Indians’ recent lawsuit asserting land claims over much of Southampton, N.Y. Readers of this space will not be surprised to learn that I take a dim view of the claim. (Walter Olson, “This Land Is My Land”, Jun. 26). For more, see my City Journal treatment of the issue, and, on this blog, most recently Jun. 13 and Jun. 19 (& welcome Michelle Malkin readers).
More: it’s reported there’s dissension among tribe members about the action (William L. Hamilton, “Casino Interest in Land Bid Divides Tribe in Hamptons”, New York Times, Jun. 26). And according to the Washington Post, while the lawsuit looms as a serious hassle for some in Southampton, the wealthiest of the wealthy are paying little heed: “The high-net-worth crowd doesn’t really worry about this sort of thing. That’s for the locals,” says Hampton Sheet publisher Joan Jedell. Insecurity of property as a hazard? That’s only for the little people. (Michael Powell, “Old Money and Old Grievances Clash in Haven of the Very Rich”, Jun. 25).
(Bumped 6/27, a.m.)
{ 2 comments }
Following a three-year federal probe (see Jan. 28-29, 2002), a grand jury in Los Angeles has indicted retired Palm Springs entertainment lawyer Seymour Lazar, 78, on charges that he collected millions in kickbacks from attorneys in exchange for acting as a plaintiff in dozens of class-action lawsuits. Milberg Weiss, the law firm that represented Lazar, was not named in the indictment; it said it was “outraged” at the “baseless” implications that its lawyers had acted improperly. Mr. Lazar’s lawyer, Thomas H. Bienert, described his client as a “crusader for consumer advocacy”. (John M. Broder, “Ex-Lawyer Is Indicted on Kickbacks in Lawsuits”, New York Times, Jun. 25; Reuters/L.A. Times; Washington Post; Law.com/The Recorder; W$J).
The whole point of the rule of law is the certainty it gives the citizen. There is no greater injustice than for a citizen to be unable to determine what legal consequences would flow from an action contemplated.
— Matthew Parris, writing on the vaguely worded speech-prohibitions in the British Government’s proposed Racial and Religious Hatred Bill. (”This is no sort of way to make a law -– and no sort of law to make”, The Times (U.K.), Jun. 25). For more on the legislation, see Jul. 16, 2004 and Jun. 11, 2005.
“The Incredibles” made this point (Dec. 2 and links therein), but, with the critical and box-office success of the comic-book movie “Batman Begins,” it’s worth exploring how today’s litigation culture would make sequels impossible in real life. (Lots of spoilers after the jump.)
{ 3 comments }
