The Labor government plans a crackdown on “trivial” inmate suits, with Justice minister Jack Straw citing “imaginative” lawyers as a source of problems. Controversial cases have included a £1 million compensation bill to prisoners forced to go cold turkey on narcotics withdrawal instead of being given a heroin substitute, and “one in which a prisoner won a legal battle to have his haircuts paid for by the state while on day release”. [Times Online]
Chronicling the high cost of our legal system
-
Point of Law- "Selling Lawsuits, Buying Trouble"The Chamber's Institute for Legal Reform has published a substantial new study (PDF) of the dangers of third-party litigation financing. The authors are John Beisner, Jessica Miller and Gary Rubin of Skadden Arps. Executive summary: "Third-party litigation financing" is a... […]Walter Olson
- State of play on Alien Tort litigationLee G. Dunst of Gibson Dunn, writing in the New York Law Journal (PDF), reviews recent cases and concludes that the courts are tending to dismiss most actions filed under the Alien Tort Claims Act (also known as the Alien... […]Walter Olson
- Higher punitives for wealthier malefactorsIra Stoll at Future of Capitalism has some doubts about that new $300 million tobacco verdict.... […]Walter Olson
- The price of New York ethics, cont'dIra Stoll, Future of Capitalism: The New York state attorney general, Andrew Cuomo, won't accept campaign contributions from people with matters before his office. Conveniently enough, however, he will, and does, accept such contributions from their lawyers, Bloomberg News reports.... […]Walter Olson
- USDC: Corrupt PA Judges Have Civil ImmunityA federal district court judge has just ruled that two disgraced Pennsylvania state court judges, Michael T. Conahan and Mark A. Ciavarella Jr., are protected by immunity from facing legal action for courtroom acts that consisted of over 6000 corrupt... […]Michael Krauss
- "Selling Lawsuits, Buying Trouble"
- Volokh
- Robots, Law and SocietyI mentioned earlier a panel discussion I participated in on robots, law and society at Stanford Law School a couple of weeks ago. Adam Gorlick at Physorg.com has a good article summing up the discussion. Ryan Calo, of Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society, raises some of the fundamental liability issues and the implications [...] […]Kenneth Anderson
- Conflicts of Interest for Diplomats, Former Diplomats, and the UN: Ruth Wedgwood on Peter GalbraithRuth Wedgwood’s new column at Forbes.com takes up the uncomfortable question of Peter Galbraith and his financial dealings with regard to Kurdish autonomy, oilfields, and Galbraith’s consulting deal with a Norwegian company that could conceivably pay him somewhere up to $100 million. That discussion is very important and fraught with issues — Galbra […]Kenneth Anderson
- Against Congressional BriefsI have occasionally criticized judges and Justices who use their official positions to try to influence the legislative process. In this post I want to criticize the mirror image: Legislators who sign on to “congressional briefs” in the Supreme Court, such as the one David Kopel links to below, designed to influence the [...] […]Orin Kerr
- A Volokh Conspiracy Drinking GameAt least for VC readers who regularly follow the comment threads: Every time commenter “J. Aldridge” mentions John Bingham, you have to drink. Copyright © 2009 This feed is for personal, non-commercial use only. The use of this feed on other websites breaches copyright. If this content is not in your news reader, it makes [...] […]Orin Kerr
- Kopel brief in McDonald v. ChicagoAvailable on SSRN. (This is the abstract page. To read the full brief, click “Download,” then on the new screen click the button for which city’s server you will use for the download.) The brief is filed on behalf of the two major police training organizations in the United States: the International Law Enforcement Educators [...] […]David Kopel
- Robots, Law and Society
Media Bloggers Association
CPSIA
{ 2 comments }
Are prisoner suits in the UK subject to the loser-pays rule?
I believe they would generally fall into one of the modern exceptions that have been carved into English loser-pays, namely the exclusion of legal-aid-supported lawsuits.
Comments on this entry are closed.