From the monthly archives:

June 2009

Funny how Philip Morris, the biggest tobacco company, is the bill’s “most important ally“. [CEI "Open Market"] More: Jacob Sullum, Reason “Hit and Run”, Jonathan Adler, Volokh (”the bill represents the marriage of big government and big business”).

{ 2 comments }

“Throwing orange peels, coffee grounds and grease-stained pizza boxes in the trash will be against the law in San Francisco, and could even lead to a fine.” [San Francisco Chronicle and "Thin Green Line" blog via Coyote] And a Coyote commenter reports from a Connecticut town where

they force us to separate everything. They pick up cans, glass, plastic and newspaper. However, all the other [mandatory recycling including catalogues] must be driven to the dump/recycling center – which conveniently closes by 3pm on weekdays and by noon on Saturday. We spend at least 1.5 hours every week sorting and delivering our recycling. EVERY week.

{ 25 comments }

The Eleventh Circuit has agreed to reconsider its decision last year allowing an offended employee to sue for sexual harassment over crude sexual language not directed at her, among the sources of which was a Birmingham morning talk show. [CEI "Open Market", Fulton County Daily Report, Eugene Volokh; our earlier report]

{ 1 comment }

Per Venkat Balasubramani, the Cardinals manager’s legal claims against the micromessaging service over a spoof account “look tenuous” (via Ron Coleman).

June 10 roundup

by Walter Olson on June 10, 2009

  • British TV regulators field many complaints about performers’ setbacks on reality contest shows [Guardian via Marginal Revolution]
  • “Judge Tosses Much of Campaign Contributions Case Against Katrina Lawyer” (Pierce O’Donnell, said to have reimbursed employees for donations to Edwards race) [NLJ, earlier]
  • Patrick Fitzgerald, U.S. Attorney in Chicago, threatens to sue publisher over contents of forthcoming book [WSJ Law Blog, NY Mag "Intelligencer"]
  • Late-night neighbor dispute: “Honking horn not constitutionally protected” [Seattle Times]
  • “Strippers Sue to Be Classified as Employees, Not Independent Contractors” [NLJ]
  • Boston-based James Sokolove, biggest legal pitchman, is planning to get even bigger with $25 million ad budget [Wicked Local via Ambrogi]
  • What more satisfying for a lawyer than to win an anti-SLAPP motion against someone trying to silence one’s client? [Ken @ Popehat]
  • “Despite crazy rules, convoluted taxes and rampant lawyers, America is still a great place to do business” [The Economist]

{ 3 comments }

Don’t

by Walter Olson on June 10, 2009

Attention, lawyers in the U.K. (and elsewhere): “billing for time spent actually having sex with the client is definitely frowned upon”. [Lowering the Bar, Times Online]

{ 4 comments }

The dissatisfied customer, from Taiwan, is said to attribute his huge gambling losses to “feng shui sabotage”. [AFP/AsiaOne News via Lowering the Bar]

{ 2 comments }

Neil Munro covers it at National Journal (PDF, courtesy AmendTheCPSIA), and mentions toward the end a certain blog that “has rallied opponents of the law”. A few highlights: walkingstick2

  • “‘Like every member of Congress, I’ve heard from people in my district … [who say] they will literally be put out of business because of something that China did,’ said Rep. Jason Altmire, D-Pa., chairman of the House Small Business Committee’s Investigations and Oversight Panel. ‘We cast the net wider than we should have.’”
  • Later, however: “Altmire’s position reflects tensions in the Democratic caucus.” You bet it does: “Most Democratic legislators, staff aides, and allied advocates have resisted calls for a change in the law”, and one, regrettably anonymous, claims that opponents “are deliberately misreading the law to make it unworkable” so as to get it reopened. Among “allied advocates”, there’s Elizabeth Hitchcock, the public health advocate for the federation of state Public Interest Research Groups, who is quite dismissive of the cries of small makers going under: “Complaints about job losses in the small-business sector are usually a mask for the interests of large firms, Hitchcock said.” More on the PIRG groups here, here, here, here, here, and here (& more in comments and from Deputy Headmistress).
  • “Lobbyists on both sides of the issue” say the CPSIA outcry could affect the fate of an upcoming Waxman-backed bill called the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act, “which would apply the environmentalists’ ‘precautionary principle’ by requiring extensive safety testing of chemicals found in plastics, food, textiles, and manufactured goods before they could be sold.”

{ 5 comments }

Our post on the proposed Design Piracy Prohibition Act, and the fear of many designers and producers that it could swamp them in litigation, has been getting a lot of visitor attention, particularly from craft site Etsy. More on the topic: Grim Reader, BoingBoing.

{ 1 comment }

Florida death row inmate William Deparvine has a bona fide law degree, which has helped him keep going in his extensive litigation against the survivors of Richard and Karla Van Dusen. Deparvine was found guilty at trial of killing the Van Dusens for their vintage Chevy pickup, which he claims to have bought. [St. Petersburg Times via Obscure Store, whose headline is quoted above]

Matthew Heller at On Point News fills in considerable background regarding the “Crunchberries” and “Froot Loops” lawsuits covered earlier in this space.

{ 2 comments }

“Imagine if it worked like that with doctors. One doctor tries to heal you while the other tries to make you sicker. How popular would doctors be then?” [Warren Redlich, Albany Lawyer]

{ 12 comments }

Maybe CPSIA didn’t play so well in downstate Illinois. [Examiner]

Paul Breed, Unreasonable Rocket:

A long time ago a normal mortal could buy rocket grade peroxide. Then someone crashed their rocket pack and sued the peroxide supplier. They won and the supplier lost more on that suit than they had ever made on the small rocket grade peroxide sales. So they did the smart thing and stopped selling rocket grade peroxide to anyone that did not have a government contract.

Result: he decides to try making his own. (That sounds like a step forward for safety, doesn’t it?) What happened next, as well as commenter reactions, at the link.

{ 5 comments }

Apparently there are a lot of hidden surprises in this Waxman-Markey “cap and trade” energy/environment bill we’ll be hearing about in coming weeks [Washington Post via Virginia Postrel].

Boston Globe: “The families of two Boston firefighters killed in a West Roxbury restaurant fire and a third firefighter injured in the blaze will split $2.2 million to settle lawsuits they brought against the restaurant, its landlord, and a grease-cleaning company, according to a source involved in the agreement.” As we’ve mentioned in the past, the “firefighters’ rule”, a “doctrine that historically has barred lawsuits by public safety officers against those whose negligence has allegedly led to emergencies [...] has decayed considerably in recent years in some jurisdictions, and suits by firefighters, police, paramedics and other rescuers have multiplied.” Also of note: “when they died, [one of the two firefighters] had traces of cocaine in his blood, and [the other's] blood alcohol level was .27, three times the legal limit to drive in Massachusetts, according to two government officials who described the results to the Globe”. The firefighters’ union has thus far successfully blocked efforts to subject its members to drug and alcohol testing.

{ 2 comments }

A long-running controversy pits some elected officials and townspeople of Framingham, Mass., west of Boston, against a social service agency that has proposed the town as a site for halfway houses and other residential facilities for recovering addicts, the homeless and others. Two years ago things turned particularly unpleasant:

…[South Middlesex Opportunity Council] filed suit in federal court this week demanding damages not just from town officials, but from citizens who have dared criticize the agency and challenge its plans.

SMOC’s 99-page complaint [which alleged violations of the Fair Housing Act, federal Rehabilitation Act, Americans With Disabilities Act and Civil Rights Act -- ed.] piles up charges against selectmen and planning board members not just in their official capacity, but as individuals. It targets town employees, both named and unnamed. It calls for damages against four Framingham Town Meeting members and two citizens for comments made on a private Web site and e-mails distributed on a privately-operated mailing list.

The ACLU of Massachusetts expressed unease at the naming of private citizens as defendants over their advocacy efforts. While the lawsuit has been narrowed somewhat in the two years since then, it continues to engender much acrimony as it drags on:

Aggravating the ill will is a recent revelation that a man charged with shooting a local police officer had lived in a home run by the agency, the South Middlesex Opportunity Council, or SMOC.

{ 1 comment }

I share my views on the Edward Whelan/Obsidian Wings/”Publius” affair at Point of Law.

{ 12 comments }