John Tierney does some good reporting on the compromise federal jury verdict that criminally convicted William Hurwitz on sixteen counts of drug-dealing: “Lapses in medical judgment – or even just differences in medical judgment – have been criminalized. A doctor can be suddenly redefined as a non-doctor. All it takes is a second opinion from a jury.” Also: Kirkendall, Sullum, Kevin MD, Szalavitz, Balko, Satel (2004), Cato (2004), Hurwitz web site. Related on Overlawyered: Jan. 19, 2006, Jun. 15-17, 2001.
Archive for April, 2007
Canada: “Crook wins damages for injury during theft”
“A Canadian man who admitted shoplifting C$106 in razor blades has been awarded C$12,000 ($10,645) for injuries he suffered when he was tackled by store security guards. … [Daniel] Baines, who represented himself, said employees of the supermarket in a Vancouver suburb used unreasonable force when he struggled during his capture.” (Reuters, Apr. 20). Which suggests once again that Canada has still not “Americanized” its litigation system in any thoroughgoing way: how unlikely is it that a suit in a large American city by an injured-while-struggling thief, if successful, would result in an award as modest as $10,645? More: compare Jun. 13, 2006 (Rochester, N.Y. case).
“When someone runs out of gasoline or money…”
B.J. Khalifah of Grosse Pointe, Mich., who had a letter to the editor in the WSJ last week, takes a view of the litigation process that makes even ours look relatively upbeat (WSJ Law Blog, Apr. 24).
Penny for your thoughts
A common complaint about abusive class action litigation is that the lawyers rake in the big bucks while the class members walk away with pennies. Still, Overlawyered repeat offender Lakin Law Firm (many entries) may be taking it to a whole new level. The Madison Record reports:
Mark Brown of the Lakin Law Firm bargained a class action lawsuit down to a penny at a hearing before Madison County Circuit Judge Dave Hylla.
The suit alleges that in 1999, Old Kent Mortgage charged three borrowers $100 for a credit report, paid less than that for the report, and improperly retained the difference.
The problem with this theory at the hearing was that apparently Lakin didn’t have any idea how much the bank paid for the reports, couldn’t identify any fraudulent statements made by the bank, and couldn’t produce a contract that was breached. Other than that, the lawsuit seems fine, and I’m sure that each class member will be happy with his penny.
In all seriousness, given that just to bring the suit Lakin had to dig up as its client — the Stevens family — someone who had taken out a mortgage four years earlier (the mortgage was taken out in 1999, and Lakin did not bring the suit until 2003), I suspect that there won’t be a whole lot of other class members making claims anyway. What’s a little odd is that this suit was reportedly filed four years ago and apparently nothing has happened on the case yet.
Incidentally, the Stevens family seems to have very bad luck with banks and mortgages; they and the Lakin Law Firm filed another class action lawsuit against the bank over mortgage closing costs in 2004.
Willie Gary asks for moon, gets 1/4 moon
As David noted the other day, Florida attorney Willie Gary, whose doings are often mentioned on this site, had asked that a court award fees of $11,000 an hour for his work in a trade secrets suit against Motorola. Readers may be interested in the sequel: Circuit Judge Leroy Moe awarded Gary and other lawyers only around a quarter of their request, amounting to $23 million of the asked-for $96 million in fees and costs. The judge also passed over a request that Motorola be hit with $100 millions in sanctions and restitution, though Gary might be able to obtain further consideration of that request. (Adrian Sainz, “Motorola ordered to pay $22.9 million”, AP/Miami Herald, Apr. 20)(via Ashby Jones, WSJ Law Blog).
First Palfrey scalp
A Deputy Secretary of State resigned after ABC News tracked down his cell-phone number from the alleged D.C. madam’s records in anticipation of a 20/20 story they’ll be running on Deborah Jeane Palfrey (Mar. 20). (The Blotter via Franke-Ruta) The Washington Post story does more to play the blackmail angle that ABC ignores.
Update: and still more on the front page of the Sunday WaPo.
Kim Strassel on “trial lawyer earmarks”
Even the tort bar understands how deeply loathed it is by the American public. The Association of Trial Lawyers of America didn’t last year change its name to the bland “American Association for Justice” for nothing.
So no, even the old liberal lawsuit bulls such as Henry Waxman or [Barney] Frank won’t start calling for the repeal of the 2005 Class Action Fairness Act, or for other blatant legislative assists to the trial bar. Instead, Democrats intend to reward the legal industry with more subtle payoffs. The most obvious gift will be a moratorium on further legal reform. Beyond that, Democrats will rely on two tried-and-tested tools to aid and abet the legal community. They’ve employed both in the past few weeks. …
A Democratic Congress means far more regulation, and any new regulation is an opportunity to insert a line or two giving the tort bar greater rights to sue. These provisions will be subtle and technical, designed to escape notice. But just in case they do raise a red flag, they’ll also be tucked into bipartisan or must-pass legislation (such as the Iraq supplemental), making it that much harder for Republicans or President Bush to shoot them down.
It’s a measure of how well Republicans played tort abuse to their political advantage that Democrats today are reluctant to brazenly flack for the legal class. If the GOP wants to keep it that way, it will have to start working harder to expose the quiet ways in which the left is now helping trial lawyers bilk the system.
The other means is by taxpayer-funded subpoenas and hearings to develop evidence and publicity for the trial bar.
Strassel claims that there is such an earmark created at the behest of ATLA, subtly providing an implied cause of action against chemical manufacturers in H.R. 1591, the soon-to-be-vetoed Iraq War supplemental funding bill. Indeed, the provision is difficult to find amidst the provisions for the milk income loss contract program and renewal grants for women’s business centers. I suspect Strassel is referring to the anti-preemption provision in Section 1501(a) of the bill, effectively permitting lawsuits against chemical facilities that comply with Department of Homeland Security regulations without once mentioning the word “lawsuit.” If there is a terrorist attack on a chemical facility, trial lawyers will have a deep pocket to blame.
Perhaps we, as a society, would agree with the Democratic Party and would prefer trial lawyers, instead of the Department of Homeland Security, to be in charge of chemical plant security. (Trial lawyers do have the advantage of getting to operate only in hindsight.) But shouldn’t that critical decision be made openly?
In case you wondered
I am decidedly male (as ascertained by this test applied to a couple of my recent columns). See Dale Carpenter @ Volokh, Apr. 27, who finds that some other well-known writers aren’t the genders you might expect them to be.
Illegal Easter treats, and New Orleans King Cakes
Elsewhere around the world Ferrero Group, the Italian candy company, sells (with a suitable warning label) a treat called Kinder Surprise which consists of chocolate surrounding a small toy. However, the product is said to be illegal for sale in the United States: according to Donald Mays of Consumer Reports, “a nonfood item cannot be imbedded in a food product” under a law dating back to the 1930s. (“Choking-Hazard Easter Eggs Appear On Store Shelves”, WNBC, Apr. 5). If accurate, this would help explain something we’ve noted a couple of times in earlier posts (Feb. 1, 2002, Jan. 18, 2007), namely that store-bought Mardi Gras King Cakes do not have the little figurine baked into their batter that is found in the more authentic New Orleans versions.
People v. Phil Spector
The LA Superior Court has posted the 18-page jury questionnaire, which is relatively restrained as these things go. Less restrained appears to be the blame-the-victim tactics that defense attorneys apparently plan to use. Slate’s Timothy Noah has a good overview and is blogging the trial from his tv set; the LA Times and CourtTV also have blogs and a web page of resources. Amazingly, in the midst of a murder investigation, Spector decided to sue his first criminal defense attorney, former OJ-Dream-Teamer Robert Shapiro, who successfully bailed him out; the resulting civil deposition of Spector has to be seen to be believed, and probably has something to do with Spector’s decision to drop the suit in 2005. Spector is on his third set of defense attorneys.
Update: the LA Superior Court’s website appears to use dynamic addressing that prevents the deep-linking I’m doing for the jury questionnaire and briefing. They are available directly from the LA Superior Court page.