Class action impresario Bill Lerach’s old Lerach Coughlin firm, now renamed Coughlin Stoia, continues to prosper mightily despite the imprisonment of its former principal, but federal judge James Rosenbaum in Minnesota has now knocked $45 million off a $110 million fee request in a settlement of a class action against UnitedHealth, saying the firm would probably not have been selected as lead counsel had Lerach “timely and fully” disclosed to the court his status as a target of federal investigation. The lead plaintiff in the case was CALPERS, the California public employee pension fund that has long enjoyed cozy relations with politicians, unions and prominent class-actioneers. [Dan Levine, The Recorder/Law.com]
From the monthly archives:
August 2009
A spokesman for the prosecutor’s office said the yawn, by a cousin of a drug defendant at his plea, was “a loud and boisterous attempt to disrupt the proceedings”. The Chicago Tribune says the judge in question, Circuit Judge Daniel Rozak of Will County, resorts to contempt findings unusually often. The judge later released Clifton Williams after he had served 21 days. [Chicago Tribune, ABA Journal, Solove/Concurring Opinions]
{ 3 comments }
If you’re a judge annoyed at a court worker’s parking her car in a restricted parking space at the courthouse, don’t take it upon yourself to let the air out of her tires [Maryland circuit court judge Robert Nalley, who's stepping down from an administrative post but not from the bench after conceding the bit of self-help in question; Washington Post]
The Eastern District of Texas strikes again. [DailyTech, Concurring Opinions, Legal BlogWatch, WSJ Law Blog, earlier]
{ 9 comments }
Falls are considered “never events” under Medicare guidelines and of course are the subject of litigation against hospitals and other providers. The costs of overreaction to fear of being charged with error are not so readily measured, but are only too real:
If hospitals are scrutinized for the occurrence of falls, the natural tendency will be to focus on such events even at the expense of competing (and perhaps more important) outcomes. Unintended consequences are likely to include a decrease in mobility and a resurgence in the use of physical restraints in a misguided effort to prevent fall-related injuries.
[New England Journal of Medicine via KevinMD]
{ 9 comments }
A New Mexico appeals court says the stadium can be sued. [AmLaw Daily]
{ 2 comments }
Lowering the Bar takes note of another little advance for criminalization.
{ 9 comments }
Because without some sort of barriers to entry, how are you supposed to make the really big bucks? [Antiplanner via Coyote]
Or at least that’s the theme of a panel discussion this week from the lefty Kossack folks, claiming that card check will consign conservatives to “permanent minority” status. [ShopFloor]
{ 7 comments }
Larry Ribstein and Alexandra Lahav comment favorably, as does the pseudonymous “Kat”, and Scott Greenfield semi-snarks about my new job.
{ 2 comments }
The New York Post reports on a putative class action brought by Marc Verzani complaining that Costco’s 16-oz shrimp platter doesn’t hold 16 ounces of shrimp. The SDNY judge noted that the platter holds other materials such as sauce and lemon wedges, and simultaneously denied and ridiculed the preliminary injunction motion. Verzani was alleging $40 million in annual damages.
{ 10 comments }
Noted by Terry Teachout in his “Almanac” feature:
“He recognized that common, much litigated type of human disagreement in which each party to it insists on reducing his opponent’s position or contention to its bare essentials–yes or no; did he, or did he not, still beat his wife?–while asserting the right to state his own position or contention with every circumstantial distinction preserved. High indignation and conflicting strong senses of righteousness resulted.”
James Gould Cozzens, Guard of Honor
Eugene Volokh is troubled by a Hawaii tort case (Touchette v. Ganal, 922 P.2d 347 (Haw. 1996)) with admittedly unusual facts.
Prosecutors accuse Benjamin Eichholz of varied misdeeds, among them diverting pension fund moneys into inappropriate outlays that include a $56,100 Flora Danica fine china set on display at his home. “Eichholz maintains the china was an investment by the pension plan, according to News3OnYourSide.” Eichholz’s Savannah firm, like many others, has used actor Robert Vaughn as a TV pitchman. [ABA Journal; Tom Barton, Savannah Morning News ("probably Savannah's best-known lawyer" owing to "cheesy" ads)]
Greenwich, Connecticut, has forbidden clotheslines — in an elderly-housing complex — as a purported safety hazard. Its director not very convincingly cited “liability issues – someone running around in the backyard in the dark”. [Christopher Fountain, For What It's Worth]
{ 3 comments }
It’s a cover story entitled “CSI Myths: The Shaky Science Behind Forensics“:
Forensic science was not developed by scientists. It was mostly created by cops, who were guided by little more than common sense. And as hundreds of criminal cases begin to unravel, many established forensic practices are coming under fire. PM takes an in-depth look at the shaky science that has put innocent people behind bars.
Via Radley Balko and Scott Greenfield.
{ 1 comment }
I’ve got an out of town trip over the next few days, so posting from me is likely to consist of a relatively few scheduled short posts.
There have been several important developments with CPSIA over the past month, to which time has not yet permitted me to do justice. In particular, the CPSC late last month issued guidance on the tracking-label rules that take effect later this week. Its interpretation is more lenient on several issues than most observers were expecting, particularly for craft and small-batch producers, but the rules remain a gigantic headache for thousands of businesses.
Even more recently, the commission offered further guidance on a few other issues, notably its interpretation of what materials will be considered inherently free of lead under normal circumstances. These new rules are being cautiously welcomed as helpful to some in (for example) the apparel trade, but they are unfortunately bad news for friends of many other products, in particular vintage children’s books, which are not going to be considered intrinsically safe. Finally, the commission appears to be giving off some favorable signals on the issue of “component testing” (i.e., avoiding endless and costly re-testing of already-tested product components).
I hope to treat these new developments at more length in future posts. In the mean time, here are some relevant links:
Tracking labels: commission action and policy in PDF, Rick Woldenberg coverage, Kathleen Fasanella/Fashion Incubator, Buggalove, Play Meter (scroll to 7/27), Greco Woodcrafting, Publisher’s Weekly and earlier, Hugh Hewitt.
Intrinsically safe materials: CPSC final rule in PDF format, Rick Woldenberg and more, The Smart Mama.
The fate of vintage books: Deputy Headmistress and more, Rick Woldenberg, and — from back in the spring but not linked then — Assistant Village Idiot, Deputy Headmistress, Carter Wood, and Valerie Jacobsen as well as more.
{ 1 comment }
The settlement discussed in this space July 17 — in which lawyers nabbed more than $25 million in fees and expenses, while fewer than 100 consumers redeemed Ford coupons worth $37,500 — was covered by the Associated Press last week, which stirred outrage in many quarters [Krauss/PoL, Greenfield, Cal Biz Lit]. As Cal Civil Justice notes, the settlement was purportedly on behalf of owners who suffered no rollover or other mishap. Instead, it sought damages for losses in the vehicle’s resale value due to adverse publicity, a nicely circular theory, since the adverse publicity was in good measure propelled by various allies of the plaintiff’s bar. Interestingly, several groups that had opposed the settlement dropped their objections after it was rejiggered to require Ford to provide a $950,000 donation to what are described as nonprofit auto-safety groups (which ones?). Plaintiff’s firm Lieff Cabraser, in a letter to AP, cited that and changes in Ford advertising as reasons why the settlement provided more benefit to the customer class than can be measured by the coupons alone.
{ 1 comment }
