Posts tagged as:

Bill Lockyer

Regulating potato chip recipes

by Walter Olson on August 5, 2008

Readers will recall that acrylamide is a naturally occurring substance formed when many foods are browned or otherwise cooked and that (like countless other constituents of common foods) it appears to cause cancer in some animals at high dosages. California attorney general Jerry Brown has now reached a settlement with some large food companies that will require them to revise recipes for potato chips, French fries and other wares to reduce acrylamide content. Fun fact: one of the ways they may accomplish this goal is by artificially adding a chemical (OK, an enzyme) which works to neutralize acrylamide’s precursors. (Rosie Mestel, “Booster Shots” blog, L.A. Times, Aug. 4).

More: Bill Childs adds, “Oh, and the companies will pay California around $2.5 million.”

Tagged as: acrylamide, Bill Lockyer, French fries, Jerry Brown

{ 4 comments }

“Judge tosses global warming lawsuit against car makers”

by Walter Olson on September 18, 2007

A major rebuke for former California AG Bill Lockyer and his successor, Jerry Brown, as well: “A federal judge in San Francisco today threw out a lawsuit filed by the state Attorney General’s office against the six largest automakers in what had been billed as a novel attempt to hold the companies financially liable for global warming. … U.S. District Judge Martin Jenkins said it would be inappropriate for the court to wade into issues pertaining to interstate commerce and foreign policy – matters that should be left to the political branches of government.” The judge’s order can be found here (PDF). (Henry K. Lee, San Francisco Chronicle, Sept. 18)(cross-posted from Point of Law).

Tagged as: attorneys general, autos, Bill Lockyer, climate change, environment, global warming, Jerry Brown

{ 1 comment }

And more May 17 updates

by Ted Frank on May 17, 2007

Google beats Perfect 10 in Ninth Circuit appeal over copyright suit over thumbnail images. (Earlier: Feb. 06, Jul. 05, Nov. 04.) [LA Times; WaPo; Bashman; Perfect 10 v. Amazon (9th Cir. 2007)]
Judge thinks better over Brent Coon’s attempt to intimidate local press through subpoenas. Earlier: Apr. 24. [WSJ Law Blog]
US Supreme Court throws out punitive damages ruling in Buell-Wilson case, lets rest of decision stand. Earlier: Jan. 4 and links therein. Beck and Herrmann also discussed the case in March in the context of a larger discussion of the appropriateness of issuing punitive damages against a company that relied on government safety standards in good faith. [LA Times; AP].
Big LA Times piece on the still-pending Extreme Makeover suit, where a family seeks to hold ABC responsible for an intra-household dispute over the spoils of a reality show. Earlier: Mar. 4, Aug. 12, 2005. [LA Times]
KFC may have won on trans-fats litigation, as David reported May 3, but they capitulate to Jerry Brown’s pursuit of Lockyer’s equally bogus acrylamide suit over the naturally-occurring chemical in potatoes (Oct. 05, Aug. 05, Aug. 05, May 05, Apr. 04, etc.). KFC will pay a nuisance settlement of $341,000 and will add a meaningless warning in California stores. (Tim Reiterman, “KFC to tell customers of chemical in potatoes”, LA Times Apr. 25).
McDonald’s sued over hot coffee. Again. One of the allegations is that McDonald’s failed to secure the lid, which is a legitimate negligence suit, but there’s also a bogus “failure to warn me that coffee is hot” count. [Southeast Texas Record; and a Southeast Texas Record op-ed that plainly read Overlawyered on the subject]

Tagged as: acrylamide, Beaumont, Bill Lockyer, Brent Coon, Buell-Wilson v. Ford, copyright, Extreme Makeover, failure to warn, Ford Motor, French fries, Google, hot coffee, Jerry Brown, McDonald's, punitive damages, roundups, trans-fats

{ 3 comments }

Not your usual AG candidate

by Walter Olson on November 7, 2006

Former California Gov. Jerry Brown is overwhelmingly favored to become the state’s next attorney general, but don’t assume he’ll necessarily follow in the footsteps of Bill Lockyer:

“I’m going to take a very practical, common-sense approach as attorney general,” Brown said in a recent interview. “I’m someone who’s acutely aware of the fact that we as a state have added 25,000 laws since I was governor. I think we ought to give people some space to live their lives.” …

And don’t assume that he will agree completely with Lockyer’s decisions. Asked about the global-warming lawsuit, Brown said he’d have to “take a good look at it.”

“I think there’s an issue of causation there,” he said, adding that California needs to consider automakers’ “imploding” financial situation. …

“He was the first politician to turn litigation into a press release [as California Secretary of State, elected in 1970],” said Hiestand, the former Brown aide [Fred Hiestand, now prominent in California litigation-reform circles].

In post-Watergate 1974, the reform-minded Brown was swept into the governor’s office. One year later, Brown and the Legislature were besieged with pleas from doctors facing skyrocketing malpractice insurance costs. Brown called a special session that would eventually lead to the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act, or MICRA, California’s law capping pain and suffering awards at $250,000.

Hiestand remembers philosophical discussions with Brown on the best ways to compensate malpractice victims. After graduating from Yale Law School in 1964, Brown clerked for state Supreme Court Justice Mathew Tobriner, a contemporary of tort expert and future chief justice Roger Traynor. Brown, Hiestand said, recalled Traynor’s critical dissent in a 1962 case where a woman injured on a bus was awarded $134,000 for non-economic damages. Traynor said such awards were troubling because they are tied to subjective amounts of pain and suffering.

“At one point Jerry looks at me and says, ‘Money is a false god. If you’re in pain, you should turn to religion, sex or drugs,’” Hiestand said.

(Cheryl Miller, “Former Calif. Gov. Jerry Brown Runs for State Attorney General”, The Recorder/Law.com, Oct. 16)(cross-posted from Point of Law’s Featured Discussion on the election, which is still going great guns).

Tagged as: attorneys general, Bill Lockyer, governors, Jerry Brown, politics

Lockyer flayed on autos-’n'-global-warming suit

by Walter Olson on October 6, 2006

It’s “kooky” and “trivializes a serious problem”, editorializes the Los Angeles Times: “California shouldn’t be in the business of filing meritless suits to gain leverage in other cases“. “It’s not his job to make law through frivolous lawsuits,” opines the San Jose Mercury News (via Wilson). It’s “reprehensible… little more than a political stunt,” adds the Orange County Register. Veteran political columnist Dan Walters of the Sacramento Bee terms the suit “Lockyer’s bid to become the champion of cheesiness“. One who does like the suit, curiously enough: an environmental adviser to Gov. Schwarzenegger named Terry Tamminen. And the San Francisco Chronicle investigates: what do state lawmakers drive? More here, here and here (cross-posted from Point of Law).

Tagged as: autos, Bill Lockyer, climate change, environment

Calif. AG sues automakers for global warming

by Walter Olson on September 23, 2006

In a first-of-its-kind suit, California Attorney General Bill Lockyer is demanding damages from automakers for the impact of global warming. “Because, after all, the California attorney general is the one who should be deciding national policy on the global warming controversy,” notes Ted at Point of Law. Even accepting Lockyer’s contentions at face value, autos sold in California contribute less than 1 percent of global greenhouse-gas emissions (David Shepherdson, “Calif. sues over auto emissions”, Detroit News, Sept. 21).

Is Lockyer making it up as he goes along with the new suit, legal-theory-wise? It would seem so. His theory that autos constitute a nuisance have never been enacted as law even by the California legislature, yet he’s asserting it retroactively to punish past behavior by Detroit and Japan worldwide. His views clash strongly with those held by elected officials in many other states, which is one reason our system gives the U.S. Congress, rather than the California attorney general, the right to set national environmental policy. His notion that internal combustion engines might not be unlawful in themselves, but constitute nuisance in this case because manufacturers could be doing more to minimize their impact, makes as much sense (which is to say, no sense whatever) as if he sued California’s own drivers on the grounds that they contribute to the problem by taking unnecessary trips.

Prof. Bainbridge has quite a bit more to say about the abuse of power involved in using this type of litigation as an end run around the political branches of government which are the proper locus of authority on policy matters of this sort (Sept. 21).

Reader Earl Wertheimer writes: “I would rather see the automakers simply agree to stop selling cars in California. Let them walk & bicycle for a while. This would promote better fitness and also reduce future obesity lawsuits.”

Reader Loren Siebert writes: “I wonder if the discovery process will include how many motor vehicles the state of CA has purchased and operates.” And Nick Fenton at DTT Buzz has suggestions for more litigation (Sept. 20).

More: Lockyer “is unlikely to win” the suit, according to legal experts interviewed, especially since “a similar case brought by California and other states against utilities companies in 2004 failed in the courts”. “Even with a small chance of success, environmental advocates say the new legal action is useful and necessary”, one reason being “to pressure carmakers”. “I hope that automakers realise this will be the first of a series of lawsuits,” says Jim Marston of Environmental Defense. (Roxanne Khamsi, “California faces uphill battle on car emissions”, New Scientist, Sept. 22). EconBrowser (Sept. 24):

…the key question in my mind is not the extent to which reducing greenhouse emissions from vehicles may be a good idea, but rather whether, under previously existing U.S. law, it has been lawful to manufacture cars that emit carbon dioxide. I submit that it has, and if a judge somewhere now creatively determines that a company can be punished for such perfectly lawful behavior, then I fear that America is no longer a nation ruled by law, but rather ruled at the whim of whatever those currently wielding power happen to think might be a good idea.

Yet more: Brian Doherty, Reason “Hit and Run”, Sept. 21.

Tagged as: attorneys general, autos, Bill Lockyer, climate change, Detroit, environment, global warming

{ 7 comments }

Help wanted (Calif. shakedown practice)?

by Walter Olson on March 12, 2006

Three years ago California’s notorious Trevor Law Group was found to be mass-mailing demand letters to small businesses alleging violations of the state’s ultra-liberal s. 17200 unfair business practices act, then settling the complaints for cash. A major furor ensued, and the state bar and Attorney General Bill Lockyer made gestures toward reforming the law to prevent law firms from running “shakedown” practices. But did it work? Mike Cernovich notices that a law firm has placed an employment ad on Craigslist seeking “additional counsel” to handle an “expanding workload”. What kind of workload? Well, it’s “primarily in the practice of wage and hour law inclusive of class actions … almost all [of our] cases are settled and are rarely tried.”

That business about settling rather than trying “almost all cases” got Cernovich’s suspicions up, and then he “saw something that made my jaw drop:”

In assessing the nature of the work and return on time spent it is helpful to keep in mind that the burden of proof is always on the employer to establish that he has paid the correct wages. The law requires that the employer keep accurate and timely maintained records that show hours worked and amounts paid. Failure to maintain such records is almost always at the heart of the case ….

Furthermore the employer will be liable for our legal fees if he is unable to defense the case. These two elements [the inability to prove us wrong and threat of attorneys fees] provide our clients with extraordinary leverage to resolve the matter.

Cernovich reads this as amounting to: “we sue employers knowing that it’s unlikely they’ll be able to produce records that will prove us wrong. … In other words, let’s just sue someone, hope he can’t produce any employment records to contradict us, threaten him with attorneys fees, and then settle the case post haste.” Or is he being too suspicious? (Mar. 8). (Updated/corrected shortly after posting to fix a mistake on my part about who placed the Craigslist ad; also retitled next morning.)

More on Trevor Law Group here and here. More on wage and hour law: Mar. 10, Jan. 9 and links from there.

Tagged as: attorneys general, Bill Lockyer, chasing clients, class actions, Craigslist, federalism, s. 17200, workplace

{ 1 comment }

AG Lockyer joins California french-fry suit

by Ted Frank on August 29, 2005

Bill Lockyer has thrown the power of the state of California and its taxpayers behind the litigation lobby’s attempt to extract money from just about every food manufacturer over the alleged dangers of acrylamide. We’ve been covering these suits for years: see Apr. 6, 2004 and links therein. Of course, if every single food product and commercial building structure contains a Proposition 65 warning, the net effect is to make the real important warnings, like those on cigarette packages, less meaningful, rather than to warn people of the uncertain link between french fries and minimally elevated risks of cancer, a risk dwarfed in health effects by the difference between french fries with and without trans-fats. The press coverage universally makes no attempt to parse the studies on the subject. The fact that the press-hungry and politically ambitious Lockyer filed his suit relatively quietly on a Friday—and sued only national fast-food chains, without including two popular local chains that also serve french fries—for Saturday news coverage suggests that he’s doing this as a favor for some trial-lawyer buddies and is hoping to avoid public embarrassment. This is a good opportunity for the blogosphere to prove its stuff. And will all the Democrats who claim to be part of the “reality-based community” and correctly speak out against Republican junk science like “intelligent design” raise their voices when it’s a Democrat using junk science for corporation-bashing, or is science only to be used when it can embarrass Bush? We shall see. (Tim Reiterman, “Carcinogen Warning Sought for Fries, Chips”, LA Times, Aug. 27). Other Lockyer coverage.

Tagged as: acrylamide, Bill Lockyer, French fries, junk science, Prop 65

Update: smog fee lawyers snag $23.7 million

by Walter Olson on August 21, 2004

Latest development in the affair that brought unwelcome scrutiny to former Calif. governor Gray Davis and his ties to the Litigation Lobby (see Dec. 5, 2000 and Jun. 22-24, 2001): “Court-ordered arbitration secretly delivered a $23.7 million payday to attorneys who successfully battled the state over smog fees wrongfully charged to 1.7 million motorists. The award,” down from an original $88.5 million, “represents as much as arbiters could give the team of attorneys led by a high-powered San Diego law firm, under limits imposed by a Court of Appeal ruling in 2002.” State officials had unsuccessfully sought to keep the earlier award under wraps, and attorney General Bill Lockyer was not exactly at pains to publicize this one: “The California Attorney General’s office, after rebuffing repeated inquiries into the status of the arbitration, this week confirmed that a ruling had been issued but refused to release any more information, citing attorney-client privilege.” The Schwarzenegger administration, however, responded promptly to an open-records request. (Michael Gardner, “Lawyers get $23.7 million in smog-fee fight”, San Diego Union-Tribune, Aug. 20).

Tagged as: arbitration, attorneys general, Bill Lockyer, class actions, governors, San Diego

Lockyer to sue grocery chains

by Walter Olson on February 1, 2004

Calif. Attorney General Bill Lockyer says he’s filing an antitrust suit against Southern California grocery chains alleging that their mutual-aid strike agreement violates the federal Sherman Act. His spokesmen deny (cue laughter) that he’s trying to lend a hand to the sagging fortunes of the United Food & Commercial Workers in its 3 1/2 month old labor dispute with the chains. (”State to file antitrust suit in grocery strike”, San Francisco Chronicle, Jan. 31). “It appears the attorney general’s office is seeking a legal precedent that would scotch strike-assistance agreements in general.” Meanwhile, the Los Angeles city council is expected to vote this month on a bill which would prevent Wal-Mart from opening its SuperCenters within city limits, thus excluding the main source of competition pressing grocery prices lower. We’re sure that isn’t meant as a favor to the UFCW, either. (Shirley Svorny, “Banning Wal-Mart May Prove Costly” (commentary), Los Angeles Times, Jan. 30)

Tagged as: antitrust, attorneys general, Bill Lockyer, workplace

Tobacco: AGs push Hollywood self-censorship

by Walter Olson on September 1, 2003

“In a stunning, courageous admission that they no longer have any serious work left to do, attorneys general in two dozen states recently sent a letter to the Motion Picture Association of America asking that Hollywood minimize smoking in movies so youngsters won’t be gulled into lighting up.” (Nick Gillespie, “Tinselectomy”, Reason, Aug. 29). Check out Gillespie’s list of other destructive behaviors that Hollywood glamorizes, especially the last item. Supposedly the self-censorship will be voluntary: “We’re not saying any law has been broken,” said Tom Dresslar, a spokesman for California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, a rather remarkable admission since there is precisely zero reason for any filmmaker to pay attention to this particular grouping of law enforcement functionaries other than the fear that they could cause some sort of legal trouble in the future unless placated. (”States Ask Hollywood to Cut Film Smoking “, AP/Fox News, Aug. 27).

[click to continue…]

Tagged as: attorneys general, Bill Lockyer, movies film and videos, tobacco

El Paso case: $60 m payday for Lockyer chums

by Walter Olson on July 10, 2003

“The latest settlement in litigation over California’s energy crisis includes tens of millions of dollars in attorney fees to be shared by a handful of politically savvy plaintiffs’ firms. … Besides Lieff Cabraser, private firms that will collect a share of the fees include Kiesel, Boucher & Larson of Beverly Hills, Calif., and Girardi & Keese; Engstrom, Lipscomb & Lack; and O’Donnell & Shaeffer, all of Los Angeles. ” (Jeff Chorney, “Powerful Payday”, The Recorder, Jul. 8).

Tagged as: Bill Lockyer, Lieff Cabraser, politics, Thomas Girardi

Archived environment items, pre-July 2003

by Walter Olson on June 14, 2003

See separate entries for archived entries on animal rights and mold.

Wildlife management, species protection, 2003: “U.K. roundup” (licensing of exotic pet fish), Jun. 12-15. 2001: “False trail of missing lynx“, Dec. 18; “Pricing out the human species“, Aug. 22-23; “Stories that got away“, Jul. 23; “Bush’s environmental centrism“, Apr. 24. 2000: “Endangered list“, Dec. 4; “Snakes’ rights not always paramount” (man killed snake in self-defense), Aug. 18-20; “‘Imperfect laws add to danger of perfect storms’“, Aug. 10. 1999: “Property owners obliged to host rattlesnakes“, Oct. 12; “Knock him over with a feather” (migratory bird contraband laws), Sept. 11; “Mow’ better ADA claims” (claim of “exotic prairie plants” by resident who didn’t want to mow her lawn), Jul. 26.

“Bounty-hunting in New Jersey“, Jun. 10-11, 2003.

“‘State is suing ex-dry cleaners’” (Calif., Superfund), May 27, 2003.

“Suing ’til the cows come home“, May 20, 2003.

“U.K. roundup” (global warming suits), Jun. 12-15, 2003; “Tort suits over global warming“, Feb. 6-9, 2003; “Global warming suit?“, Jul. 31, 2001 (& Aug. 10-12); “Plus extra damages for having argued with us“, Aug. 19, 1999.

“California’s hazardous holiday” (fireplaces), Dec. 27-29, 2002; “Chestnuts-roasting menace averted“, Dec. 24-27, 2001; “Put out that match” (agricultural burning, residential wood burning), Feb. 28-Mar. 1, 2001.

“Right to know” laws, 2002: “California’s hazardous holiday” (acrylamide), Dec. 27-29; “‘Lawyers who sue to settle’“, Nov. 4-5; “Chocolate, gas-pump fumes, playground sand and so much more“, Oct. 15; “‘Greedy or Just Green’“, Mar. 13-14. 2001: “There’ll always be a California” (chocolate and Prop 65), Dec. 4; Letter to the editor (lutefisk exempted from toxic-substance status in Wisconsin), Nov. 29; “Be somewhat less afraid” (nuclear plant terrorism), Nov. 30-Dec. 2; “‘U.S. Debates Info on Chemical Hazards’” (”right to know” and terrorism), Nov. 12; “Chemical-plant vulnerabilities: read all about them“, Oct. 1. 1999: “Lockyer vs. keys” (California attorney general declares brass a toxic hazard), Nov. 2.

“How much did you say that Indian legend was worth?“, Sept. 25-26, 2002; “Final innings for Kennewick Man“, Sept. 27-28, 2000; “Free Kennewick Man!” (pre-Columbian remains), Oct. 11, 1999.

Low exposures, 2002: “A breast-cancer myth“, Sept. 3-4; “‘Unharmed woman awarded $104,000′” (Canada), May 6. 2001: “There’ll always be a California” (chocolate and Prop 65), Dec. 4; “‘Incense link to cancer’“, Aug. 27-28; “‘Candles might be polluting your home, EPA says’“, Jun. 19; “While you were out: the carbonless paper crusade“, Apr. 25 (& letter to the editor, May 18); “Hunter sues store over camouflage mask“, Jan. 12-14. 2000: “‘Airbag chemical on trial’“, Aug. 14; “Multiple chemical sensitivity from school construction“, Jul. 3-4; “Feelings of nausea? Get in line” (Baton Rouge chemical spill), Jan. 26-27. 1999: “Lockyer vs. keys” (California attorney general declares brass a toxic hazard), Nov. 2.

Zoning, land use, 2002: “How much did you say that Indian legend was worth?“, Sept. 25-26; “‘Preserving’ History at Bayonet Point“, Feb. 15-17; “Planners tie up land for twenty years“, Jan. 18-20. 2001: “Columnist-fest” (John Tierney on NYC battle over IKEA site), May 25-27; “Lessons of shrub-case jailing“, May 17; “Perils of regulatory discretion“, Jan. 24-25. 2000: “Cornfield maze as zoning violation“, Oct. 30. 1999: “Great moments in zoning law” (rescued pets from storm, charged with running unlawful animal shelter), Nov. 22.

“Mercury in dental fillings“, Jul. 16-17, 2002 (& Nov. 4-5, 2002).

“Going to blazes” (logging and Western fires), Jul. 1-2, 2002; “Credibility up in smoke?” (same), Jul. 12-14, 2002; letter to the editor, Oct. 23.

Industrial farming: “‘Tampa Judge Tosses Out Class-Action Suit Against Hog Company’“, Jul. 3-9, 2002; “RFK Jr. blasted for hog farm remarks“, Apr. 15, 2002 (& Apr. 17, Apr. 19-21, letter to the editor and editor’s response, Apr. 19); “Chickens are next“, Feb. 6-7, 2002; “Judge throws out hog farm suit“, May 7, 2001; “Trial lawyers vs. hog farms“, Dec. 7, 2000; “This little piggy got taken to court“, Sept. 12, 2000; “Not so high off the hog“, Oct. 4, 1999.

“‘San Francisco Verdict Bodes Ill for Oil Industry’“, Jun. 11-12, 2002.

“‘Legal fight over chemical spill ends with whimper’” (W.V.), Jun. 7-9, 2002.

“Flowers, perfume in airline cabins not OK?” (Canada), May 17-19, 2002; “Scented hair gel, deodorant could mean jail time for Canadian youth“, Apr. 24, 2000.

“The mystery of the transgenic corn“, May 14-15, 2002.

“Erin Brockovich”, 2002: “‘Erin Brockovich, the Brand’“, Apr. 29-30. 2001: “Exxon Brockovich vs. Erin Valdez“, Nov. 15; “NBC mulls Brockovich talk show“, Nov. 6, 2001; “Brockovich a heroine? Julia really can act“, Mar. 23-25. 2000: “Errin’ Brockovich?“, Dec. 21, 2000; “‘All about Erin’“, Oct. 12; “More woes for ‘Brockovich’ lawyers“, Jun. 22-25; “Brockovich story, cont’d: the judges’ cruise“, Apr. 18; Brockovich story breaks wide open“, Apr. 17; “Plume of controversy“, Apr. 14-16; “Hollywood special“, Mar. 30. 1999: “A Civil Action II?“, July 7.

Trial lawyer/enviro alliance? “RFK Jr. blasted for hog farm remarks“, Apr. 15, 2002 (& Apr. 17, Apr. 19-21, letter to the editor and editor’s response, Apr. 19); “‘Working’ for whom?” (Environmental Working Group), May 23, 2001; “Judge throws out hog farm suit“, May 7, 2001; “‘Bogus’ assault on Norton“, Jan. 18, 2001; “Trial lawyers vs. hog farms“, Dec. 7, 2000.

“‘Former clients sue attorney O’Quinn’” (Kennedy Heights case), Apr. 8-9, 2002.

“Arsenic: one last dose?“, Mar. 22-24, 2002; “The view from Arsenictown“, Sept. 11, 2001; “‘The arithmetic of arsenic’“, Aug. 17-19; “Bush’s environmental centrism“, April 24; “Tempest in an arsenic-laced teacup?“, Apr. 18; “‘Bogus’ assault on Norton“, Jan. 18; “The Times vs. Gale Norton“, Jan. 15; “Ecology and economy“, Jan. 5-7, 2001.

“Liability concerns fell giant sequoia“, Mar. 12, 2002.

“Environmental lawsuits vs. military readiness“, Jan. 2-3, 2002.

“Overlawyered schools roundup” (environmental impact statement for teacher layoffs?), Dec. 7-9, 2001.

“Infectious disease conquered, CDC now chases sprawl“, Nov. 9-11, 2001.

“States lag in curbing junk science“, May 29, 2001.

“‘Family awarded $1 billion in lawsuit’” (Louisiana land contamination), May 24, 2001.

“Prospect of $3 gas“, May 10, 2001.

Who needs power anyway?: “Sweetness and light from Bill Lockyer“, Jun. 1-3, 2001 (& see June 8-10, June 22-24); “California electricity linkfest“, Mar. 26, 2001; “Brownout, Shivers & Dim, attorneys at law“, Oct. 11, 2000; “Worse than Y2K?” (EPA/DOJ suit against coal-burning utility plants), Nov. 18-19, 1999.

“Seventh Circuit rebukes EPA” (Superfund search and seizure), Apr. 23, 2001.

Attorneys’ fees: “Stories that got away” (Endangered Species Act suits), Jul. 23, 2001; “Losers should pay” (columnist Thomas Sowell; injunctions, bonding requirements), Aug. 4-7, 2000; “Marbled Murrelet v. Babbitt: heads I win, tails let’s call it even” (”one-way” fee shifts), Sept. 8, 1999 (& see National Law Journal, Dec. 14, 1999).

“Enviro litigator: debate belongs in Congress, not courts“, Dec. 29, 2000-Jan. 2, 2001.

“Federal power over mud puddles?” (wetlands case), Nov. 28, 2000.

“From the evergreen file: cancer alley a myth?“, Nov. 8, 2000.

“‘A Civil Action’ and Hollywood views of lawyers“, Jun. 20, 2000.

“Don’t cooperate” (lawyers’ advice re local health survey), Jun. 9-11, 2000.

“EPA’s high courtroom loss rate“, May 26-29, 2000; “When agencies like getting sued“, Dec. 6, 1999.

“After the great power-line panic“, May 24, 2000; “Another scare starts to fizzle” (endocrine disrupters), Aug. 19, 1999.

“This side of parodies” (”dihydrogen monoxide” parody), May 10, 2000.

“Diapered wildlife?” (animal emissions as environmental problem), Apr. 10, 2000; “Backyard trash burning” (suspected as major dioxin source), Jan. 6, 2000.

“Emerging campaign issue: ‘brownfields’ vs. Superfund lawyers“, Apr. 4, 2000; “Mayors: liability fears stalling ‘brownfields’ development“, Feb. 26-27, 2000.

“Lawyers for famine and wilderness-busting?” (anti-biotech), Jan. 3, 1999.

“Weekend reading: evergreens” (Race car great Bobby Unser’s snowmobiling rap), Dec. 3-5, 1999.

“Leave that mildew alone” (EPA considers mildew-proof paint to be pesticide), Nov. 30, 1999.

“Flag-burning protest requires environmental permits” (one for smoke, one for fire), Nov. 3, 1999.

“A mile wide and an inch deep” (EPA considers Platte River impaired because sun heats it up), Oct. 15, 1999.

“Careful what you tell your lawyer” (feds demand waiver of lawyer-client confidentiality in environmental cases), Sept. 14, 1999; “Overlawyered skies not always safer” (environmental audits and other “self-critical analysis”), Jul. 19, 1999.

“Tainted cycle” (class action over infectious bacterium in Milwaukee water supply), Sept. 2, 1999.

Articles by Overlawyered.com editor Walter Olson:

“Hollywood vs. the Truth” (”Civil Action” movie), Wall Street Journal, December 23, 1998.

“Don’t Steal This Book“, review of Property Matters by James DeLong, Wall Street Journal, April 2, 1997 (property rights).

“Lawyers with Stethoscopes: Clients Beware“, Manhattan Institute Civil Justice Memo # 26, June 1996.

Tagged as: acrylamide, animal rights, attorneys general, Bill Lockyer, Canada, environment, Erin Brockovich, Exxon, global warming, Louisiana, Manhattan Institute, New Jersey, Prop 65, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Superfund, Wisconsin

March 2003 archives, part 1

by Walter Olson on March 10, 2003

March 10-11 – “Burglars to be banned from suing victims”. United Kingdom: “Burglars who are injured while committing a crime are to banned from suing their victims for compensation. David Blunkett, the Home Secretary, has bowed to public pressure after the outcry over the case of Brendon Fearon, the burglar who is trying to sue Tony Martin for £15,000 after being shot while breaking into his home.” (David Bamber, Daily Telegraph, Mar. 9). (DURABLE LINK)

March 10-11 – Clear Channel = Deep Pocket. “With damage claims in the Rhode Island fire expected to run up to $1 billion, two lawyers representing victims have set their sights on a potential defendant with very deep pockets: Clear Channel Communications. The broadcasting giant owns WHJY-FM, a Providence radio station that ran ads for the Great White concert at The Station that ended moments into the first song when pyrotechnics set off by the band ignited the nation’s fourth-deadliest fire. A popular disc jockey at WHJY, Michael Gonsalves, introduced Great White and was among the 99 who died in the fire or from injuries suffered in the blaze. The two Providence lawyers, who between them represent about a dozen victims, said yesterday their expected lawsuits will almost certainly name Clear Channel as a defendant. The company, the largest operator of radio stations in the country, has assets that far outstrip those of the 14 defendants who were named in the only lawsuit filed so far.” (Jonathan Saltzman, “R.I. fire victims’ lawyers eye firm”, Boston Globe, Mar. 8). (DURABLE LINK)

March 10-11 – New Medicare drug benefit? Link it to product liability reform. “Even drugs like aspirin, which cause hundreds of deaths each year, could not meet the safety standards patients expect today,” argues Scott Gottlieb of the American Enterprise Institute. ” … But putting [older] patients on the pills they need means we need to prepare to tolerate more side effects or tolerate more lawsuits. Litigation should not be a cost of commerce when government puts itself in the business of pushing pills. … Without product liability reform, prescription drug coverage will transform into a full employment act for the lawyers, limiting development of new drugs and driving up prices for everybody.” (Scott Gottlieb, “More Drug Use Will Mean More Lawsuits,” AEI On the Issues, Mar.). (DURABLE LINK)

March 10-11 – Lawsuits vs. free speech, cont’d: jailhouse rock. Last year VH1 aired a special entitled Music Behind Bars, featuring the music of prisoners. Now the family of a West Virginia man murdered in 1994 by one of the inmate-performers is suing the network. The family’s lawyers are arguing that whether or not the network compensated the convicted killer for his performance — it says it did not — its broadcast occasioned the family emotional distress for which it should have to pay compensatory and punitive damages. (Maria Lehner, “Murder Victim’s Family Sues VH1″, Fox News, Mar. 6). (DURABLE LINK)

March 8-9 – Tobacco fees: feds indict former Texas AG. One of the biggest developments yet in the tobacco-fee saga: a federal grand jury is charging former Texas attorney general Dan Morales and his friend Marc Murr with conspiracy and mail fraud over Morales’s attempt to gain hundreds of millions of dollars in fees for Murr from the state’s tobacco settlement. More recently, Morales has suggested that he might be able to furnish information that would throw in question the fee entitlements of five politically influential trial lawyers who managed the state’s case (R. G. Ratcliffe and Clay Robison, “Former Attorney General Dan Morales indicted”, Houston Chronicle, Mar. 6; April Castro, “Ex-Attorney General Morales Indicted”, AP/Washington Post, Mar. 6; “Former Texas Attorney General Surrenders”, AP/ABC News, Mar. 7). For earlier coverage, see Jul. 15, 2002 and links from there; Jan. 10-12, 2003. (DURABLE LINK)

March 8-9 – Should have watched his step answering call of nature. Update: an appeals court in the Australian state of New South Wales has overturned the $60,000 judgment (see Mar. 5, 2002) awarded to Paul Jackson, who after a night drinking with friends walked home along a highway and “stepped over a low guard rail in order to urinate, not realising there was a drop of several metres.” The “plaintiff was not taking reasonable care for his own safety as he was obliged to do,” the justices said. (”That’s a long drop”, Sydney Morning Herald, Mar. 5; “Wee change in fortune for Wollongong man”, Aust. Broadcasting Corp., Mar. 5). (DURABLE LINK)

March 5-7 – Update: hospital rapist’s suit dismissed. Sandusky, Ohio: “A judge has dismissed the $2 million lawsuit filed by a convicted rapist who claimed the hospital where he sexually assaulted a woman was negligent because it didn’t prevent the crime, according to court records.” ((Richard Payerchin, “Ruling: Convict responsible for his own crime”, Lorain Morning Journal, Feb. 20)(see May 22-23, 2002). (DURABLE LINK)

March 5-7 – Stuart Taylor, Jr., on lead paint litigation. At his most scathing: “[O]ne group deserves a special niche in the annals of those who have perverted the legal system for personal and political gain at the expense of everyone else: the politically connected trial lawyers who have signed up Rhode Island, Chicago, San Francisco, St. Louis, and dozens of other governments, school districts, and housing authorities to sue over health hazards associated with sales of lead pigment and paint for indoor use. The last of those sales took place more than 45 years ago.” With details on the unusual “retainer agreement” with which former Rhode Island AG Sheldon Whitehouse signed over the state’s sovereign authority to two influential private law firms: “It not only guaranteed the lawyers a contingent fee of 16.67 percent of any money recovered, plus all litigation expenses; it also gave them considerable control over whom to sue, what to claim, whether to settle, and on what terms.” (Stuart Taylor Jr., “Perverting the Legal System: The Lead-Paint Rip-Off”, National Journal/The Atlantic, Feb. 19) (DURABLE LINK)

March 5-7 – Incoming link of the day. From the website of a Fort Worth, Texas cardiology practice: “We do not provide ANY email advice regarding medical issues. DO NOT contact us by email with clinical questions. The email addresses above are for business correspondence only. For some insight as to why, click here.” (DURABLE LINK)

March 5-7 – $6 million fee request knocked down to $25,000. Ouch! An appeals court in El Paso has upheld a trial judge’s decision to “award a group of plaintiffs’ lawyers $25,000 in attorney fees instead of the nearly $6 million they sought under a contingent-fee contract.” However, the attorneys, led by brothers Stephen F. Malouf and E. Wayne Malouf, are unlikely to go hungry; they’ve apparently obtained upwards of $2 million in fees from other aspects of the case, a complex litigation over oil rights. (Brenda Sapino Jeffreys, “Appeals Court Says Trial Judge Had Discretion to Reduce Fees”, Texas Lawyer, Feb. 26). (DURABLE LINK)

March 4 – “The Tort Tax”. “According to a new study by Tillinghast-Towers Perrin, the total cost of the U.S. tort system reached $205.4 billion in 2001, an increase of 14.3% over the previous year — far faster than the rate of economic growth. This is like a tax of 2% on everything in the American economy that takes $721 per year out of the pockets of every citizen.” Also cites a certain “excellent website that, unfortunately, I find too depressing to read regularly”. (Bruce Bartlett, syndicated/National Review Online, Mar. 3). (DURABLE LINK)

March 4 – Thrill of the chase. NYC: “A half-dozen personal-injury lawyers were charged [last week] in a scam that allowed a network of corrupt hospital employees to do the ambulance-chasing for them, authorities said. In at least three hospitals — Elmhurst, New York Presbyterian and Lincoln — emergency-room workers sold the attorneys confidential medical records of car-accident victims, evaluating the sales potential of the information as doctors were evaluating the patients for treatments, authorities said. Officials were clued in on the scheme — which ran for seven years — by a hospital employee after patients began complaining about calls at home from strangers who knew a lot about their medical conditions, according to Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau.” (Tom Perrotta, “Personal Injury Lawyers Indicted for Soliciting Scam”, New York Law Journal, Feb. 27; Laura Italiano, “Lawyers Charged in Hosp. E.R. Scam”, New York Post, Feb. 27). (DURABLE LINK)

March 4 – “Edwards doesn’t tell whole story”. In stump speeches since the outset of his political career, Sen. John Edwards has invoked the case of little Ethan Bedrick, a cerebral palsy victim, as emblematic of “the kids and families I’ve fought for.” One reporter was curious to learn more about Bedrick’s case, but Edwards’s campaign press secretary “told me if I wanted to know any details, I should ‘look it up.”’ So she did. It turns out Edwards’ firm obtained a settlement, often described as being for $5 million, of a lawsuit charging that asphyxiation during delivery caused Ethan’s disability. Edwards’s speech picks up the story only later, when Ethan’s family battled a health insurer to obtain needed therapy (Lynn Sweet, Chicago Sun-Times, Feb. 27) (& see letter to the editor, Mar. 31). (DURABLE LINK)

March 3 – By reader acclaim: “Man who threw dog into traffic sues dog’s former owner”. “A man who threw a dog to its death in a fit of road rage is suing the dog’s former owner and a newspaper, alleging mental anguish and seeking more than $1 million in damages. … [Andrew] Burnett was sentenced in July 2001 to three years in jail in the death of Leo, a bichon frise whose owner tapped Burnett’s bumper in rainy-day traffic in February 2000 near the San Jose Airport. Burnett threw the little dog into traffic before driving off.” (AP/San Francisco Chronicle, Feb. 28; Dan Reed, “Leo the dog’s killer claims mental anguish in suit”, San Jose Mercury News, Feb. 28). (DURABLE LINK)

March 3 – Update: Lockyer sues complaint mill. Following a continuing furor in California (see Jan. 15-16) about entrepreneurial lawyers’ practice of filing assembly-line complaints against thousands of small businesses, which then are informed that they must pay thousands of dollars to get the charges dropped, state Attorney General Bill Lockyer has announced that he is suing the most-publicized such law firm, Trevor Law Group, under the same unfair-business-practices law that it employs in its complaints. “Trevor Law Group operates a shakedown operation designed to extract attorneys’ fees from law-abiding small businesses,” Lockyer said. “They’ve abused one of the state’s most important consumer protection statutes and dishonored attorneys who practice law in the public interest. There’s some delicious irony in turning the weapon around and using it on them.” (Monte Morin, “State Accuses Law Firm of Extortion”, Los Angeles Times, Feb. 27; Dan Walters, “In ironic twist, law firm finds itself on other end of suit”, Sacramento Bee, Mar. 3). See also Jessica V. Brice, “Wave of lawsuits threatens 70-year-old consumer law”, AP/Sacramento Bee, Jan. 21). (DURABLE LINK)

Tagged as: attorneys general, Australia, Bill Lockyer, Clear Channel, contingent fee, deep pocket, emotional distress, free speech, hospitals, Houston, Italian, John Edwards, lead paint, Ohio, Rhode Island, Rhode Island Station nightclub fire, Stuart Taylor Jr., Tillinghast, tobacco, tobacco settlement, West Virginia

January 2003 archives, part 2

by Walter Olson on January 20, 2003

January 20 – U.K.: coercive campaign to constrain Cadbury… In Britain, a “leading public health expert” is proposing a legal ban on extra-large chocolate bars and a code of conduct for snack food companies which “would include promises to cut the size of their portions by 20 per cent and to stop selling ‘over-sized’ sweets”. Particularly offensive to coercive nutritionists is some food companies’ practice of offering an extra-large package at a price only slightly higher than that of the smaller size. (Severin Carrell, “Why that big, fat KitKat could be the death of you”, The Independent, Jan. 19) (& welcome TongueTied readers). (DURABLE LINK)

January 20 – … and climbing cost of “compensation culture”. “The compensation culture, in which ‘every mishap leads to a complaint’ and often to legal action, is changing the face of Britain and costing about £10 billion a year, a report says today. … Compensation paid by insurance companies and public authorities amounts to one per cent of GDP, actuaries estimate. The figure is growing by 15 per cent a year. … However, the 35 per cent spent on administration in Britain compares well with the 58 per cent in America.” Schools, police forces and the ministry of defense are all being sued more frequently. (Joshua Rozenberg, “Price of ’suing for every mishap’ is £10bn”, Daily Telegraph, Dec. 17; “Compensation claims ‘costing UK £10bn a year’”, Ananova/Guardian, Dec. 17; Robert Verkaik, “Lawyers earn £3bn yearly from injuries culture”, Independent, Dec. 17; London Institute of Actuaries/Edinburgh Faculty of Actuaries, press release; “The Cost of Compensation Culture”, Dec. 2002 (PDF)). (DURABLE LINK)

January 17-19 – Vt. high court: ALL-CAPS DISCLAIMER on front page of employee handbook not unambiguous enough. “Sidestepping an all-capitals disclaimer on page one of an employee handbook, Vermont’s Supreme Court has revived a woman’s right to sue her ex-employer for breaching an implied contract when it fired her.” Although the disclaimer said: “THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES CONTAINED IN THIS MANUAL CONSTITUTE GUIDELINES ONLY. THEY DO NOT CONSTITUTE PART OF AN EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT, NOR ARE THEY INTENDED TO MAKE ANY COMMITMENT TO ANY EMPLOYEE,” the court ruled that the woman could nonetheless ask a jury to construe the manual’s contents as generating a legally enforceable promise. (Andrew Harris, “Big Disclaimer No Bar to Employee Suit”, National Law Journal, Jan. 15). (DURABLE LINK)

January 17-19 – “Ich Bin Ein Tort Lawyer”. Train disasters in the Austrian Alps and in Germany in recent years, which killed 155 and 101 people respectively, have resulted in the filing of massive personal-injury lawsuits in New York City, although very few Americans numbered among the victims and most of the defendants being sued are European companies. American lawyers (including Edward Fagan, who also drew critical attention in the Holocaust-assets litigation — see Jun. 24, 2002) argue that so long as they designate at least one American as lead plaintiff, they should be able to bring any number of other nonresident plaintiffs in on the same action. Such forum-shopping enables the lawyers to sidestep rules in German and Austrian courts that ban contingency fees, cap damages, require the losing side to compensate the winners, and restrict discovery and the use of class actions. (Michael Freedman, Forbes, Jan. 6). (DURABLE LINK)

January 17-19 – Blog-appreciated. Yesterday (Jan. 16) we got Slashdotted, with a reader’s suggestion that we cover a lawyer’s cease-and-desist letter sent to the maintainer of a “free PCI device table” (we readily admit we don’t know what those devices are). AngryRobot describes an indecorous canine-generated outdoor hazard which seems only too likely to eventuate in the sort of personal injury case “destined to be on Overlawyered” (Jan. 16). Our return from hiatus last month was generously hailed by Susanna Cornett in Cut on the Bias (Dec. 13), and by the web’s premier chronicler of appellate law, Howard Bashman’s How Appealing (Dec. 15 and Dec. 30). Dean Esmay (Dean’s World, Jan. 10) calls us “one of the best sites on the web”. We’ve also been mentioned lately on Employers’ Lawyer (Jan. 12), MedRants (Jan. 11), Larry Sullivan’s Delaware Law Office (Nov. 12)(on loser-pays, which Sullivan dubs “winner wins”), Nikita Demosthenes (Oct. 19), and on many link lists including those of Rick Henderson, Nikki, Esq., Carey Gage, Professor Bunyip, John Ray, and Skunk by the Ocean. All this incoming link activity leaves us at #155 in the BlogStreet Top 200 blogs (ranked by number of those who link to us). A special tip of the hat to Scott Norvell’s recently launched TongueTied site, cataloguing excesses of political correctness, which generates an impressive amount of traffic for us. And we turn up in a sidebar in Germany’s Der Spiegel Online (Frank Patalong, “Wahre Lügen”, on the “Stella Awards” list of spurious cases, Nov. 29). (DURABLE LINK)

January 15-16 – Furor over California complaint mills. Beverly Hills, Calif. law firm Trevor Law Group has used the state’s bounty-hunting consumer-protection laws to file complaints en masse against auto repair shops, nail salons, and hotels, from which it then demands settlements. Even Calif. attorney general Bill Lockyer, no foe of the plaintiff’s bar, says he is “disgusted and appalled” by Trevor’s most recent mass litigation campaign, against more than 1,000 restaurants and food stores, many small and immigrant-owned. Business owners are organizing in response and many news outlets have run indignant editorials (Cindy Chang, “Backlash against lawsuit gains steam”, Pasadena Star-News, Jan. 2; Traci Jai Isaacs, “Business owners claiming old law used in ’shakedowns’”, South Bay Daily Breeze, Jan. 14; California Restaurant Association “Call to Action”, Jan.; KABC-TV 7, “Auto Lawsuits”, Dec. 3; Civil Justice Association of California, “Legal Shakedowns Hitting Thousands of California Businesses”, Dec. 6; “Mass Produced Claims Against Nail Salons”, Dec. 6 (PDF)). Radio’s “John and Ken Show” has also been covering the controversy and its online audio segments (three December dates) are described by one reader as quite lively in tone, although we haven’t had the chance to listen to them. (& see Mar. 3) (DURABLE LINK)

January 15-16 – Sis-Boom-Sue. Jenny Lawson is suing the Des Moines school district, alleging she broke her leg when she collided with another cheerleader while cheering for the wrestling team at Roosevelt High School. “The suit claims the district was negligent for — among other things — failing to have cheerleaders perform on an absorbent mat and encouraging more than one cheerleader to jump at once. Drew Bracken, an attorney for the Des Moines district, said he knew of no schools with such rules. ‘I’m not aware of a requirement that cheerleaders perform on an absorbent mat. I’ve never heard of it before,’ Bracken said.” (Mark Siebert, Des Moines Register, Jan. 2). (DURABLE LINK)

January 13-14 – “Wacky Warning Label” winners. This year’s winner in Michigan Lawsuit Abuse Watch’s Wacky Warning Label contest is a label on a robotic massage chair that warns, “Do not use massage chair without clothing” along with “Never force any body part into the backrest area while the rollers are moving”. “Second place goes to a snowblower label that says ‘Do not use snowthrower on roof.’ Third is a kitchen label that says, ‘Do not allow children to play in the dishwasher.’” (multiple outlets; Business Wire, Jan. 8) (earlier winners: Jan. 25-27, 2002; Jan. 19-21, 2001; Jan. 18, 2000) (DURABLE LINK)

January 13-14 – Cochran: City Hall to blame for arson/murder by drug dealer. “In a legal memo expected to land at City Hall in a matter of days, attorney Johnnie L. Cochran Jr. will claim the city bears responsibility for the October arson murder of an East Baltimore family — in part because the anti-drug ‘Baltimore Believe’ campaign encouraged residents to speak out against dealers, a lawyer working with Cochran said yesterday. Cochran is representing relatives of the Dawson family, who prosecutors say were killed in retaliation for reporting neighborhood dealers to police.” (Laura Vozzella and Del Quentin Wilber, “Anti-drug campaign blamed in Dawson arson deaths”, Baltimore Sun, Jan. 8)(via WSJ Best of the Web) (DURABLE LINK)

January 13-14 – Anti-diet activist hopes to sue Weight Watchers. “U.K.-based psychotherapist Susie Orbach, author of Fat Is A Feminist Issue, is planning a lawsuit against Weight Watchers on behalf of what she says are thousands of women and men who have paid out many hundreds of British pounds to the company, only to end up fatter than before they started the program. … Orbach’s suit would be the first to hold a weight-loss company responsible for clients’ gaining the weight back.” (”Diet Dispute”, ABC News, Jan. 9). “‘Now that the general public is taking absolutely no responsibility, we retailers are starting to get anxious,’ says Simon Doonan, creative director of the Manhattan clothier Barney’s. ‘If people are suing McDonald’s for making them fat, one does wonder how far we are from an era where individuals will attempt to sue us when they buy clothes that make them look fat.’” (Joanne Kaufman, “Seasonal Pain and Suffering”, Wall Street Journal, Nov. 29) (DURABLE LINK)

Tagged as: attorneys general, Baltimore, Bill Lockyer, contingent fee, Delaware, Europe, Germany, Michigan, Vermont

April 2002 archives, part 1

by Walter Olson on April 10, 2002

April 10 – Soap star: ABC wrote my character out of the show. “A former star of ABC’s daytime drama ‘All My Children’ has filed a lawsuit for nearly $32 million, claiming that the network lied to him and damaged him professionally and financially.

“Michael Nader, who played the dark, dashing and rich Hungarian Count Dimitri Marick on ‘All My Children’ for nearly 10 years, says in court papers that he ‘became ill’ in February 2001 and went on medical leave.

“Nader, 57, was in fact in drug treatment after a narcotics arrest in Manhattan’s East Village. The district attorney’s office said he pleaded guilty and was sentenced May 22, 2001, to three years of probation.

“Nader’s Dimitri character …was written out of the show in 1999. The character was resurrected in 2000 but was written out again in 2001 after Nader’s arrest and rehab. … Nader says [in court papers] he told ABC in March 2001 that he was ready to work but officials there told him to continue on medical leave. … [Later they] refused to release him from his [$1.7 million five-year] contract [signed in April 2000] so he could work elsewhere.” (”Former ‘All My Children’ Star Files Suit”, AP/Newsday, Apr. 3). (DURABLE LINK)

April 10 – “Peter’s Pence”. Baltimore plaintiff’s lawyer and political czar Peter Angelos, who had been demanding $1 billion in fees for representing the state of Maryland in its tobacco suit, has ended the dispute by agreeing to take a mere $150 million instead. The people over at the National Association of Manufacturers’ Human Resources Policy Department feel awfully sorry for the Orioles owner for having to settle for such a measly amount and have launched a “Peter’s Pence” campaign by which readers can collect the spare change off their dresser tops and send it to him to help make up some of the extra $850 million (”Workplace Watch”, NAM, April; Daniel LeDuc, “Md., Angelos Reach Tobacco Fee Deal”, Washington Post, Mar. 22). (DURABLE LINK)

April 10 – “Can Pain Treatment Survive Our Addiction to Law?”. After suffering the effects of a partially collapsed lung, writer Jonathan Rauch learns firsthand how much pain sufferers have to lose if our runaway litigation system takes away their access to the revolutionary pain relief medication OxyContin (National Journal/Reason Online, Apr. 6). See also Damien Cave, “No relief”, Salon, Apr. 4; Duane Freese, “In Rx, Who’s To Blame For Abuse?”, TechCentralStation.com, Feb. 14; and earlier reports on this site: Jan. 23-24, 2002, Aug. 7-8 and July 25, 2001. Updates: see May 30, Aug. 27. (DURABLE LINK)

April 8-9 – An eggshell psyche at U.Va. Law. Worst harassment suit of the year? At the University of Virginia, first-year law student Marta Sanchez on Feb. 26 filed “a claim of assault and battery in Albemarle Circuit Court, seeking $25,000 in compensatory damages and $10,000 in punitive damages” against Prof. Kenneth Abraham, a nationally prominent scholar in tort law. To quote Wendy McElroy’s summary of the case: “During an introductory program last August, Abraham demonstrated a legal principle known as the ‘egg-shell skull rule’ from Vosburg v. Putney, a case commonly taught in torts classes [in which one child's minor battery on another unexpectedly causes major harm to the victim]. Abraham announced his intention to show the class of about twenty students how a slight contact could be actionable. Then Abraham briefly touched Sanchez on her fully clothed shoulder. …Former students confirm that the shoulder tapping is a standard part of Abraham’s lesson on Vosburg. Sanchez says the tap flooded her with memories of being terrorized, raped and molested when she was 11 years old and living in her native land of Panama.” “What some would characterize as mere touching to this victim was an extreme event,” said Sanchez’s lawyer, Steven Rosenfield. “What makes it different is that she was the victim at the hands of men in the past.” (DURABLE LINK)

SOURCES: Nick Denton, “University student sues law professor”, Cavalier Daily, Mar. 27; AP/Richmond Times-Dispatch, Mar. 26; Wendy McElroy, FoxNews.com, Apr. 2; Justin Park, “Student sues professor”, Virginia Law Weekly, Mar. 22 (PDF); blogs InstaPundit, Mar. 25 and Mar. 26 and DaveTepper.net, Mar. 25.

April 8-9 – Zero tolerance leaves ‘em gasping. School districts across the country are decreeing that “students with asthma must keep their emergency inhalers in the school office, rather than on hand.” Better time your attacks for after school, guys (Catherine Seipp, Reason, Apr.). (DURABLE LINK)

April 8-9 – “Former clients sue attorney O’Quinn”. “Twenty former clients of lawyer John O’Quinn are suing him for alleged mishandling of the Kennedy Heights and Chevron contamination settlement, in which they received $12 million instead of the $500 million that he asserted their claims were worth.” Billed at the time as a major “environmental racism” case, the Kennedy Heights litigation asserted that toxic residues had caused cancers and other ailments among the largely African-American residents of the Houston neighborhood, a charge disputed by defendant Chevron. But were the clients really unaware that it’s standard practice for lawyers in this country to talk up a far higher valuation for injury claims than those claims are actually likely to settle for? The former clients also say O’Quinn used his involvement in the Kennedy Heights case for image-buffing purposes to help beat a 1998 disciplinary rap. “A similar [pending] lawsuit was filed in 1999 by about 80 former plaintiffs who were Kennedy Heights residents claiming O’Quinn allegedly shortchanged them on a settlement.” (Jo Ann Zuniga, Houston Chronicle, Apr. 3). In 1999, when former breast implant clients filed a complaint against O’Quinn, the combative litigator struck back with a libel suit against the women’s lawyer which resulted in a quick gag order shutting down the story (see Aug. 4, 1999). (DURABLE LINK)

April 8-9 – Traffic-cams: Volokh v. Labash. UCLA law prof Eugene Volokh, in a contrarian vein, ventures to defend the red-light cameras that some cities use to generate speeding tickets, arguing that if they are operated in a non-abusive way they hold out promise of being more objective than traffic cops (”The Cameras Are Watching — And It’s a Good Thing”, Wall Street Journal, Mar. 26, reprinted at author’s site). However, Matt Labash’s new investigation for the Weekly Standard shows that the use of cameras in practice has been anything but free from error and abuse (example: cities’ propensity to shorten the duration of yellow lights to bolster revenues). There will be little reason to trust the system’s integrity so long as cities go on letting a contractor run the program in exchange for a share of ticket revenues: as we’re always emphasizing on this site, contingency fees and trustworthy law enforcement just don’t mix (see Sept. 6, 2001) (Matt Labash, “Inside’s the District’s Red Lights”, Weekly Standard, Apr. 1; “The Yellow Menace”, Apr. 2; “The Safety Myth”, Apr. 3; “Getting Rear-Ended by the Law”, Apr. 4; “Fighting the Good Fight”, Apr. 5). (Update/correction: the original post named Lockheed Martin as the contractor in charge of the program, but a reader advises us (see letter, Apr. 19) that Lockheed sold its photo traffic-enforcement division to Affiliated Computer Services Inc. of Dallas, Texas on August 24, 2001; we have corrected the text accordingly). (DURABLE LINK)

April 5-7 – Right to yell “fire”. In Denver, Claudia Huntey is suing her landlord, which she says violated disability-rights law when it evicted her. “She was cruelly thrown out of her apartment solely because she makes involuntary vocalizations due to her Tourette’s syndrome,” said her attorney, John Holland, who said the apartment managers should have made greater efforts to accommodate Huntey’s condition after repeated complaints from other residents of the complex. “What happened to Claudia Huntey is a societal wake-up call reminding us that this continuing struggle is far from over,” said Holland. For neighbors, the wake-up calls were of a different nature: Huntey suffers from more than usually intense symptoms of Tourette’s, as a result of which “[t]he intensity of the constant, involuntary sounds cause her ribs and chest muscles to ache, and she is chronically hoarse from yelling. … For reasons she does not understand, Huntey most often says or yells, ‘Fire!’”. (Sue Lindsay, “Tourette’s sufferer sues, charging unfair eviction”, Rocky Mountain News, Apr. 4). (DURABLE LINK)

April 5-7 – From the grave, instructions to sue. Brooksville, Fla.: “A woman who hanged herself in jail while waiting to face charges in her husband’s death asked in a suicide note that her lawyer sue the jail for allowing her to die. … [Laren] Sims, 36, was awaiting extradition to California to face charges of killing her attorney husband, Larry McNabney, and burying him in a vineyard. ‘My impression is she’s got a scam going even in death,’ said San Joaquin County prosecutor Lester Fleming, who was trying to extradite Sims to California. ‘It’s just an amazingly cold-blooded note.’” (”California woman accused in husband’s murder urged suit based on suicide”, AP/Boston Globe, Apr. 4). (DURABLE LINK)

April 5-7 – Avoid having a medical emergency in Mississippi. The malpractice-suit crisis in the Magnolia State just keeps getting worse: “The Mississippi Trauma Advisory Committee has suspended re-inspection of its hospitals for a year to give health officials time to address the growing problem of surgeons leaving the system.” The state legislature, in which trial lawyer-legislators occupy strategic positions (see June 15, 2001), adjourned without heeding the doctors’ plea for legal relief. (”Mississippi in trauma crisis as surgeons leave”, AP/Memphis Commercial Appeal, Mar. 19)(& see Jun. 3-4, 2002). (DURABLE LINK)

April 5-7 – Advice the whole country could use. P. J. O’Rourke, reviewing two etiquette books: “[M]uch of their advice [the "Etiquette Grrls"] is needed by the entire nation: ”It is much, much more polite simply to tell someone ‘See you in hell’ than ‘See you in court.”’ (New York Times Book Review, Mar. 24). Also: Michael Kinsley on suing as “our national sport” (scroll to near end) (”Social Hypochondria”, Washington Post, Mar. 1). And: author Philip Howard (The Death of Common Sense) is launching a new organization called the Coalition for the Common Good that will gather participants from across the political spectrum in an effort to curb legal excess (Michael Barone, “The Common Good”, U.S. News, Mar. 25; Stuart Taylor, Jr., “How More Rights Have Made Us Less Free”, National Journal/The Atlantic, Feb. 12). (DURABLE LINK)

April 3-4 – High court nixes back pay for illegal aliens. Last week, in Hoffman Plastic Compounds v. NLRB, the Supreme Court by a 5-4 vote ruled that illegal aliens can’t collect damages for being fired from jobs it was never lawful for them to hold (Gina Holland, “Supreme Court Restricts Illegal Workers’ Rights in Employment Cases”, AP/Law.com, Mar. 28; see Oct. 28, 1999). Our editor has a new piece out in National Review Online today (Wed.) expressing relief that for the moment at least the country will be free of this absurdity. (Walter Olson, “A Wink Too Far”, Apr. 3). For a contrasting view, here are the editorialists at the San Francisco Chronicle (”Green light for abuse”, Apr. 2).

April 3-4 – “Addictive” computer game blamed for suicide. 21-year-old Shawn Woolley of Hudson, Wisc. played the popular online game EverQuest a whole lot. Then he committed suicide. Now his mother Elizabeth says she plans to sue Sony Online Entertainment, saying the game should have come with a warning label concerning its “addictive” nature, and she’s lined up attorney Jack Thompson, veteran of earlier litigation attacks on videogame companies (see, for example, July 22, 1999). A psychiatrist had diagnosed Shawn with depression and schizoid personality disorder which “fed right into the EverQuest playing,” claims Mrs. Woolley. “It was the perfect escape.” A specialist in “computer addiction” appears on cue in the article, as if summoned by the lawyer, to say that “The manufacturer of EverQuest purposely made it in such a way that it is more intriguing to the addict” and that it “could be created in a less addictive way, but (that) would be the difference between powdered cocaine and crack cocaine.” Moreover, “[h]aving low self-esteem or poor body image are also important factors, he said.” (Stanley A. Miller II, “Death of a game addict”, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Mar. 30) (and see letter to the editor from attorney Jack Thompson, Apr. 11). (DURABLE LINK)

April 3-4 – Microsoft case and AG contributions. Columnist Robert Novak rather rudely totes up the very considerable contributions that Microsoft’s rivals have been making to the campaigns of state attorneys general like Bill Lockyer in California and Carla Stovall in Kansas, both of whom are running for governor (Robert Novak, “Money driving Microsoft case?”, Chicago Sun-Times, Apr. 1) (& see Apr. 15). Blogger Ed Driscoll reminds us that AGs also have another constituency that wants them to keep the pressure on Redmond, namely trial lawyers who stand to gain a fortune from the private suits against the company (Mar. 31; see Jeff Taylor, “Symposium: Microsoft Endgame?”, National Review Online, Nov. 5, 2001).

April 3-4 – Ninth Circuit orders Agent Orange payments. The federal appeals court that does so much to provide this site with material has ordered that Vietnam veterans who were exposed to Agent Orange and later contracted prostate cancer and diabetes be given disability payments, “setting a precedent that could cover many illnesses linked to the defoliant.” (”Some Agent Orange Veterans Win Payments”, Reuters/New York Times, Apr. 2). The problem remains that health authorities are by no means agreed that the compound had anything to do with those ailments or most of the others complained of. (Howard Feinberg, “Vetting Agent Orange”, TechCentralStation.com, Mar. 11; Reason links, Feb. 28) (see Jan. 7-8).

April 1-2 – Intel Corp. versus yoga foundation. For more than a year lawyers for giant chipmaker Intel Corp. have been menacing the Yoga Inside Foundation of Venice, Calif., claiming that the nonprofit group’s name infringes on its own “Intel Inside” trademark. “Yoga Inside has nothing to do with computers. It provides free yoga classes in schools, treatment facilities, shelters, prisons and underprivileged communities.” Founder Mark Stephens says the similarity of the slogans “never even crossed my mind” until the company complained. Because of the large sums it has spent to promote its trademark, “Intel argues, the linguistic construction ‘(Blank) Inside,’ whether concerning state-of-the-art technology or a centuries-old spiritual practice, should uniquely belong to the chipmaker.” As for the bad karma to be had in picking on a little group like this, “We’re certainly sensitive about that,” said Intel spokesman Chuck Mulloy. “But our hands are tied because of the way the law is structured”. (David Lazarus, “Intel forces yoga group to fight for its name”, San Francisco Chronicle, Mar. 29; Slashdot thread) (DURABLE LINK)

April 1-2 – No more ANZAC Day marches? Australia has rapidly Americanized its liability system and is now paying the price in the form of a drying up of insurance for local events such as ANZAC Day, which honors veterans. “Federal Assistant Treasurer Helen Coonan called [a Mar. 27] forum to share ideas after a series of community events had to be cancelled because of the insurance crisis. … Earlier, Senator Coonan said it was common sense to restrict the ability of those injured while drunk, drug-affected or committing a crime to sue for compensation.” (”States thrash out insurance crisis”, AAP/News.com, Mar. 27; “Quick insurance savings ruled out”, AAP, Mar. 27). With medical claims spiraling, New South Wales health minister Craig Knowles has warned that the nation’s “main medical malpractice insurer could collapse within weeks”, which could leave 60 percent of Australia’s doctors “uninsured for private practice work, and throw the health system into chaos”. (Mark Robinson, “Doctors’ insurer on brink of collapse”, Sydney Morning Herald, Mar. 22). (DURABLE LINK)

April 1-2 – Roger Parloff on 9/11 fund. “If the victims may have no viable claim in the tort system after all, because no one was really at fault for their deaths other than the terrorists, then why must a compassion-driven, taxpayer-financed fund pay what the tort system might theoretically have extracted from a totally hypothetical, deep-pocketed, unambiguously guilty defendant? … [Critiques of the Feinberg proposals as insufficiently generous] demonstrate the otherworldly sense of entitlement that the tort system now fosters.

“In setting up an alternative to the tort system, Congress made an admission that cannot be retracted. … What they said, in essence, was this: In all probability, skilled plaintiffs’ lawyers representing sympathetic victims would convince juries that the airlines were responsible for what happened. That’s because plaintiffs’ lawyers have become expert at redirecting blame from judgment-proof targets toward minimally blameworthy, solvent targets. We all know that such ‘fault’ is, to some degree, a fiction. It’s just a compassionate way to ensure that grievously injured, inadequately insured people get taken care of. The trouble is, when catastrophes get big enough, not even corporate entities are sufficiently deep-pocketed to pay without other innocent human beings suffering as a result. In blaming and bankrupting the airlines — or the private security firms, or the airports, or the municipalities that operate them, or Boeing Corporation, or any of the other usual suspects — we will obviously be scapegoating minimally blameworthy corporations for the nation’s universal unpreparedness. In so doing, we will be creating new waves of innocent victims: airline employee-shareholders who, like Enron’s, see their retirement funds vaporize; public and private employees who are thrown out of work; local residents whose public services deteriorate and whose taxes rise when their local municipal authorities in New York, New Jersey, or Boston go broke.” So now how about applying those lessons in other areas of mass tort litigation? (Roger Parloff, “Tortageddon”, The American Lawyer, Mar. 18). (DURABLE LINK)

April 1-2 – Gary & Co. shenanigans at Maris trial. Last August, after a three-month trial, a Gainesville, Fla. state court jury awarded the family of late baseball star Roger Maris $50 million against Anheuser-Busch Inc. in a dispute over the termination of a beer distributorship. The family had earlier lost an antitrust case against the beer company in federal court. They were represented at the August trial by noted Stuart, Fla. attorney Willie Gary (slavery reparations 1, 2, 3, Loewen, Disney, Coke, Gannett, Microsoft, etc.) who joined the family’s legal team two months before trial on a contingency fee basis.

Court records depict the trial, presided over by senior judge R.A. Green Jr., as a veritable carnival of lawyer misconduct. “At the beginning of this trial,” wrote Judge Green, “it became apparent to the court that counsel, primarily plaintiff’s counsel, would ‘press the limits’ of proper conduct and compliance with directives of the court.” Judge Green found two attorneys on Gary’s team, including his co-counsel and partner Madison McClellan, to be in contempt, whicle Gary himself “was ejected from the courtroom at one point and silenced by the judge on another occasion for uttering a profanity”. Moreover, “the Maris legal team sent a private investigator to conduct surveillance on the defense lawyers’ offices”, to which the defense lawyers responded with counter-surveillance. Judge Green then took the highly unusual step of appointing special master Stephen N. Bernstein to conduct a confidential investigation of lawyer misconduct at the trial. In a 35-page report, the special master concluded that the behavior of Gary and the other lawyers was “an insult to the integrity of the legal system,” and “resulted in an atmosphere that elevated tactics in pursuit of opposing counsel over the duty to pursue truth.” (Larry Keller, “Maris Trial Had Its Share of Misbehaving Lawyers”, Miami Daily Business Review, Jan. 28). Updates Jan. 5 and Jan. 7, 2004: (ethics charges against Gary thrown out by judge); Sept. 5, 2005 (case and related litigation settle for sum in excess of $120 million). (DURABLE LINK)

April 1-2 – New traffic records on Overlawyered.com. Our best month ever for number of pages served (March), best week ever (last week) and best day ever (last Wednesday). Thanks for your support!

Tagged as: Anheuser-Busch, antitrust, attorneys general, Australia, Baltimore, baseball, Bill Lockyer, Chevron, contingent fee, Dallas, Denver, governors, hospitals, Houston, Jack Thompson, John O'Quinn, libel slander and defamation, Maryland, Mississippi, New Jersey, reparations, tobacco, trademarks, Willie Gary, zero tolerance

March 2002 archives, part 2

by Walter Olson on March 20, 2002

March 20-21 – No more restaurant doggie bags. In Australia, the restaurant doggie bag is in decline because of fears that patrons will store food at improper temperatures, allowing the growth of food-poisoning bacteria. “The Australian Leisure and Hospitality Group, which has 142 hotel restaurants across the country, has banned patrons from taking home leftovers. Victoria has already brought in anti-doggie-bag legislation, with other states tipped to follow before the end of the year, Mr Deakin said. ‘If we are the cooker of the food we are liable,’ he said.” (”Restaurants ban doggie bags”, The Advertiser (Adelaide), Mar. 18). Meanwhile, in the U.K.: “Some restaurants in Britain are forcing customers who like their meat rare to sign a disclaimer form before eating due to fears of the risk of E. coli and salmonella poisoning, the Sunday Times newspaper reported.” (”British Eaters Who Like Rare Meat Sign Disclaimers”, Reuters/Yahoo, Mar. 18).

March 20-21 – “School told to rehire cocaine abuser”. Florida: “Escambia County Schools must rehire a school employee who reported to work with cocaine in his system – 50 times above the cutoff level for a positive drug test. Robert K. Sites III, 37, initially was terminated after arriving at Brentwood Middle School on Aug. 10 in an agitated and nervous state. A ‘reasonable suspicion’ drug test revealed cocaine metabolites in his system. An independent arbitrator ruled this month that a penalty less severe than termination was warranted and wants Sites rehired with full pay and benefits.” (Lisa Osburn, Pensacola News Journal, Mar. 15). Under zero tolerance rules, of course, schools can suspend or even expel a student for possessing aspirin or other ordinary over-the-counter drugs.

March 20-21 – Lawyer: deep-pocket defendants are real culprits in identity theft. Perpetrators of the fast-growing crime of “identity theft” sometimes use fraud, stealth or dumpster-diving to obtain data on potential victims from businesses in the form of credit card or employment data. “Companies that contribute to identity theft by failing to protect their customers’ and employees’ Social Security numbers and other personal information could be held liable, some observers warn. Although relatively few cases of this type have been filed so far, some observers predict that with the incidence of identity theft rising, more frustrated victims will successfully sue companies that fail to protect this information … Sean B. Hoar, Eugene, Ore.-based assistant U.S. attorney for the District of Oregon, said he has spoken to groups of plaintiffs attorneys on the topic and the reaction has been ‘My gosh, this is a huge new area for civil litigation because of the likely liability that will be incurred.’ ‘I think that victims of identity theft are becoming much more cognizant of the fact that they have been hurt more by the negligent or careless acts of the companies than they are by the criminals,’ said Mari Frank, a Laguna Niguel, Calif.-based attorney who has specialized in the area of identity theft since she became a victim herself in 1996.” (Judy Greenwald, “ID theft suits in the cards”, Business Insurance, Mar. 4, subscriber-based site).

March 20-21 – McElroy on wrongful life suits. FoxNews.com columnist Wendy McElroy surveys the burgeoning field of “wrongful life” and “wrongful birth” suits following “the birth of a disabled child whom the mother would have aborted had she received adequate medical information.” The concept has been familiar in American courts for years and has cropped up in France and Australia recently as well. “The human cost of this new litigation is terrible. Parents publicly tell a child that they wish he or she had never been born.” (Wendy McElroy, “Parents Sue Doctors for ‘Wrongful Birth’ of Disabled Child”, FoxNews.com, Mar. 19)(see Aug. 22, 2001).

March 19 – Teen beauty pageant lands in court. In suburban Detroit, the outcome of this year’s Miss Teen St. Clair Shores beauty pageant was tainted, according to parent Barbara Scheurman’s legal complaint on behalf of her 15-year-old daughter Jennifer, which is expected to reach a local court next month. The controversy concerns whether the winning contestant should have been allowed to redo her talent presentation; a $200 savings bond and crown was the prize. (Tony Scotta, “Shores pageant judge defends her ruling”, Macomb Daily, Mar. 13).

March 19 – So depressed he stole $300K. Minnesota prosecutors are charging appeals court judge Roland Amundson, 52, who has resigned from the bench, with stealing more than $300,000 from a trust fund that a father had left for his developmentally disabled daughter. The judge’s attorney, Ron Meshbesher, said his client plans to plead guilty and “attributed Amundson’s actions to depression that followed his mother’s death”. According to prosecutors, however, his honor was not too depressed to put part of the money to use “to buy bronze statues, marble flooring, antique chairs and other items for himself.” (Pam Louwagie and Randy Furst, “Judge charged with stealing $300,000 from woman’s trust”, Minneapolis Star Tribune, Feb. 27; Elizabeth Stawicki, “Court’s credibility damaged by Amundson, judges say”, Minnesota Public Radio, Mar. 11). Update July 1-2: sentenced to 69 months. (DURABLE LINK)

March 19 – “Bad movie, bad public policy”. Among reasons to skip the Denzel Washington vehicle John Q: “at the end of the movie, we see real footage of Hillary Clinton and Jesse Jackson advocating for expanded federal health insurance. Last time I checked, though, countries with government-run health plans were less likely to give dying kids organ transplants, or the powerful drugs needed to keep their bodies from rejecting the new organs after the operation.” (Robert Goldberg (Manhattan Institute), “Painful John Q“, National Review Online, Mar. 8).

March 18 – Injured in “human hockey puck” stunt. “An Avon man has sued the Colorado Avalanche hockey team for negligence, claiming he was seriously injured during a ‘human hockey puck’ event Dec. 13, 2000, at the Pepsi Center. Ryan Netzer claims that during one of the intermissions, he was selected to take part in the event, in which he was slung by a bungee cord across the ice rink on a metal sled, according to the lawsuit filed Wednesday in Denver District Court.” Joseph Bloch, Netzer’s lawyer, says the organizers omitted protective padding that was supposed to be on boards into which his client slammed, suffering two leg fractures. “Prior to the event, Netzer signed a waiver.” (Howard Pankratz, “Fan sues Avalanche over stunt injuries”, Denver Post, Mar. 15).

March 18 – Couldn’t order 7-Up in French. “A federal government employee is suing Air Canada for more than $500,000 because he could not order a 7-Up in French.” Michel Thibodeau, 34, has already won a favorable determination from the Commissioner of Official Languages over the incident on an Aug. 14, 2000 flight from Montreal to Ottawa which resulted in an altercation after Mr. Thibodeau, “who is fluently bilingual, was unable to use French to order a 7-Up”. He wants $525,000 and an apology. “‘I am not asking for a right here, I am exercising a right I already have,’ Mr. Thibodeau said shortly after filing his lawsuit.” (Ron Corbett, “Air Canada sued over language dispute”, Ottawa Citizen/National Post, Mar. 2).

March 18 – Columnist-fest. Perennial-favorite scribes come through for readers again:

* Those consumer-battering steel import quotas are just temporary, says President Bush, and if you believe that … (Steve Chapman, “Relief from imports, for as long as it takes”, Chicago Tribune, Mar. 14);

* Airport security checking is a “ridiculous charade” because of officialdom’s continued pretense that “the 80-year-old Irish nun, the Hispanic mother of two, the Japanese-American businessman, the House committee chairman with the titanium hip” are all just as likely hijacker candidates as the young Middle Eastern man (Charles Krauthammer, “The Case for Profiling”, Time, Mar. 18; see also “Profiles in Timidity” (editorial), Wall Street Journal, OpinionJournal.com, Jan. 25);

* Dave Kopel says the abusive municipal gun lawsuits have served to galvanize a firearms industry that has historically shied away from politics: “Pearl Harbor day for the gun industry was the day that [New Orleans mayor] Marc Morial filed his lawsuit”. (”Unintended Consequences”, National Review Online, Mar. 6). See also Jacob Sullum, “Too many guns?”, Reason Online, Jan. 4 (on “oversupply” gun-suit theories).

March 15-17 – Texas docs plan walkout. More than 600 physicians in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas are planning to walk off the job April 8 to protest the state’s malpractice climate (Juan Ozuna, “‘Walkout’ Planned by Physicians”, McAllen Monitor, Feb. 16; Mel Huff, “Doctors discuss fallout from lawsuit abuse”, Brownsville Herald, Feb. 21; “The Doctor is Out”, McAllen Monitor, Feb. 19; “Sick system”(editorial), Brownsville Herald, Feb. 22). In famously litigious Beaumont, only one neurosurgeon is left practicing, which Texas Medical Association vice president Kim Ross calls “a scary thing … What if a patient has a car wreck, needs a neurosurgeon, and there’s none available? It’s an hour to Houston. That ‘golden hour’ [when treatment is most beneficial] is lost.” (Vicki Lankarge, “Soaring malpractice premiums bleed doctors, rob consumers”, reprinted by Heartland Institute, Jan.) “Channel-surf wherever you will; sooner or later (probably sooner) you’ll encounter an attorney urging you to bring your problems to him or her. Some are shameless in their opportunism: Have you suffered from respiratory problems? Throat inflammation? Sinus woes? Come see me; let’s find somebody to sue.” More than half of Texas physicians had claims filed against them in 2000, the Dallas Morning News has found. (”Litigation explosion plagues physicians” (editorial), Corpus Christi Caller-Times, Jan. 24 (via CALA Houston)).

March 15-17 – “Before you cheer … ‘Sign here’”. There are few things that trial lawyers loathe with more passion than the liability waivers that schools have parents and students sign before going out for extracurricular activities such as field trips or cheerleading. They’re carrying on a state-by-state campaign to get courts to strike down such waivers, voluntarily entered or not. (Mark Clayton, Christian Science Monitor, Mar. 12).

March 15-17 – “Politicians’ Syllogism”.

“Step One: We must do something;

“Step Two: This is something;

“Step Three: Therefore we must do it.”

– Jonathan Lynn & Antony Jay in the British television series “Yes, Minister” (via Prog Review; site on show; Hugh Davies, “Celebrities and friends say fond farewell to Sir Nigel”, Daily Telegraph, Jan. 10 (memorial for show star Sir Nigel Hawthorne, who died Dec. 26)).

March 13-14 – “Greedy or Just Green?”. “In the last few days of December, Kamran Ghalchi sent more than 3,000 California businesses an unwelcome holiday greeting — legal notices claiming they were in violation of Proposition 65, a one-of-a-kind California law requiring warnings on products that contain potentially dangerous chemicals. More than half of Ghalchi’s December notices were filed against car dealers and other automotive businesses throughout the state. Warnings at gas stations are a familiar sight to Californians, but car dealers do not warn customers that buying a car could expose them to oil, gasoline and car exhaust. In a letter offering to settle with one dealer, Ghalchi demands $7,500 to settle right away: $750 of it in fines to the attorney general, the rest split evenly between Ghalchi and Citizens for Responsible Business, a new Proposition 65 enforcement group that is the plaintiff in all of Ghalchi’s December filings.”

Recent figures from Sacramento indicate that of “citizen suit” settlements by companies for failing to post Prop 65 warnings, less than eight percent of payouts go to the state, while two-thirds go to plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees and costs, and much of the remainder to freelance enforcement groups that work with the lawyers. Even California attorney general Bill Lockyer, no friend of business, detects “an odor of extortion around many of these notices that concerns me’”. (Bob Van Voris, National Law Journal, Feb. 26).

March 13-14 – U.K. soldiers’ claim: brass didn’t warn of war trauma. In Great Britain, a high court lawsuit accuses the Ministry of Defence of “failing to adequately prepare service personnel for their inevitable exposure to the horrors of war”. Nearly 2,000 potential claimants have registered an interest in the action, which seeks to recover for post-traumatic stress disorder, according to Queen’s Counsel Stephen Irwin, arguing on their behalf. “Mr. Irwin said that the case was ‘enormous’, would take a very long time and would cost a ‘great deal of money’”. (”MoD sued over trauma from ‘horrors of war’”, London Times, Mar. 4; Joshua Rozenberg, “2,000 sue MoD over psychiatric injuries of war”, Daily Telegraph, Mar. 5)(see also “Britain’s delicate soldiery”, Dec. 22, 2000).

March 13-14 – Education reforms could serve as basis for new suits. “Robin Hood” lawsuits prevailing on courts to order equalization of spending between rich and poor public school districts have been a dismal failure even on their own terms, undermining local taxpayers’ willingness to shoulder property tax burdens. But undaunted by previous fiascos, activist education lawyers figure the answer is yet more litigation: they’re hoping to latch onto new federal mandates for uniform test scores as the basis for a renewed round of lawsuits arguing that underperforming schools have a constitutional right to more money. (Siobhan Gorman, “Can’t Beat ‘Em? Sue ‘Em!”, Washington Monthly, Dec. 2001).

March 13-14 – I’ve got a legally protected bunch of coconuts. “A Slidell businessman who painted 150 green-and-white coconuts to pass out at the city’s St. Patrick’s Day parade got a visit Thursday from a business partner of the Zulu Social Aid and Pleasure Club, which has been tossing gilded and glittery coconuts on Mardi Gras for decades. ‘The guy told me that as soon as I put paint on a coconut, I was infringing on their copyright,’ said Ronnie Dunaway, who owns Dunaway’s Olde Towne Market. ‘I was absolutely dumbfounded that there were laws about what you can and can’t do with a coconut.’” (Paul Rioux, “Zulu partners clamp down on copy-cat coconuts “, New Orleans Times-Picayune, Mar. 8).

March 12 – Texas trial lawyers back GOP PAC. Sneaky? In Houston, plaintiff’s lawyers traditionally aligned with the Democratic Party are funding a “Harris County GOP PAC” which has endorsed candidates in today’s Republican primary for Supreme Court, Congress, the state legislature, and county attorney. Though unaffiliated with the official Republican organization, the PAC has sent voters a slickly produced brochure whose “logo even mimics the official logo of the Harris County Republican Party, which features an elephant inside of a star”. (”Harris County GOP PAC funded by plaintiff’s lawyers”, Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse Houston, undated March; John Williams, “Republicans want distance from PAC”, Houston Chronicle, Mar. 7).

March 12 – Liability concerns fell giant sequoia. “The Sonora Union High School District, owner of the property, had been concerned about liability if the 85-foot-tall tree fell on its own.” (Melanie Turner, “Giant sequoia felled despite legal wrangling”, Modesto Bee, Feb. 23) (via MaxPower blog, Feb. 17).

March 12 – A “Jenny Jones Show” question. Why do ads for injury lawyers so often air on the same TV shows as debt-restructuring ads aimed at viewers desperate for financial relief? — wonders blogger Patrick Ruffini (March 8).

March 11 – Fast-food roundup. The Chicago Tribune is reporting that McDonald’s Corp. is on the verge of settling lawsuits brought on behalf of vegetarians over its use of beef extract as a flavoring agent for French fries; the terms include “$10 million to charities that support vegetarianism and $2.4 million to plaintiffs’ attorneys.” Yum! (Ameet Sachdev, “McDonald’s nears deal on fries suit”, Chicago Tribune, March 7; AP/Fox News, Mar. 9; see May 4, 2001, and Rediff.com coverage: May 4, May 8, July 3, 2001). Public health activists are taking aim at the food industry’s sinister ploy of providing customers with big portions, in a contrast with the inflationary 1970s when activists denounced the same companies’ shock-horror practice of shrinking the size of the candy bar or taco (Randy Dotinga, “Super-Size Portion Causing U.S. Distortion”, HealthScoutNews/ Yahoo, Feb. 19). Whatever happened to the old notion of “leave some on the plate for Miss Manners”, anyway? On EnterStageRight.com, Steven Martinovich analyzes the next-tobacco-izing of snack food, quoting our editor on the subject (”The next moral crusade”, Feb. 25). Also see accounts on ConsumerFreedom.com: Jan. 24, Jan. 30, Feb. 5. And a lefty commentator for a British newspaper has concluded that our battle with the waistline is really all capitalism’s fault: Will Hutton, “Fat is a capitalist issue”, The Observer, Jan. 27.

March 11 – Parole board’s consideration of drug history could violate ADA. In a case filed by inmates at the state prison in Vacaville, Calif., a Ninth Circuit panel has ruled that parole boards may violate the Americans with Disabilities Act if they regard a prisoner’s history of drug addiction as a reason to accord any less favorable disposition to his request to be turned loose early, such history counting as a disability protected under the law. Sara Norman, a lawyer for the inmates, said the ruling “might also apply to those suffering mental disabilities covered by the ADA. … The panel also suggested that the ADA covers a panoply of law enforcement decision making, including arrests.” The case “could lead to a swell of court challenges”. (Jason Hoppin, “ADA Applies to Decisions About Parole, Says 9th Circuit”, The Recorder, Mar. 11).

March 11 – Editorial-fest. Sense is breaking out all over: “The government’s impulsive entrance into the victim-compensation business was born of a one-time mix of compassion and political expediency, but it sets an unaffordable precedent at a time when the nation faces the likelihood of more terrorist acts.” (”Why Is One Terrorism Victim Different from Another?” (editorial) USA Today, Mar. 8). The Washington Post, which has helped lead the case for reform of nationwide class action procedures, is back with another strong editorial on the subject (”Restoring class to class actions”, Mar. 9). And following the lead of its sister Fortune (see Feb. 18-19), Time is out with a piece asking why workers themselves should put up with the widespread abuse of asbestos litigation (”The Asbestos Pit”, Mar. 11).

Tagged as: asbestos, attorneys general, Australia, Beaumont, Bill Lockyer, Colorado, copyright, Dallas, Denver, Detroit, France, French fries, hospitals, Houston, Manhattan Institute, Minnesota, Oregon, Prop 65, tobacco, wrongful birth and wrongful life, zero tolerance

December 2001 archives, part 1

by Walter Olson on December 10, 2001

December 10 – “Halliburton Shares Plunge on Verdict”. The market clipped $3.8 billion off the giant oil field service company’s share valuation after Peter Angelos got a $30 million jury award against it. “The ruling is the fourth significant asbestos ruling against Halliburton since late October, according to Merrill Lynch … Over the last 25 years, Halliburton has settled 194,000 asbestos claims, the company said. The average payment was about $200, according to Allen Brooks, executive director at CIBC World Markets. As of Sept. 30, the company faced 146,000 open asbestos claims and 182,000 more from a former subsidiary called Harbison-Walker.” (David Koenig, AP/Yahoo, Dec. 7; Neela Banerjee, “Halliburton Battered as Asbestos Verdict Stirs Deep Anxieties”, New York Times, Dec. 8). Federal-Mogul, the big auto parts maker, became the latest large bankruptcy to result from asbestos litigation with a filing two months ago (Joe Miller, “Asbestos suits hurt Fed-Mogul”, Detroit News, Oct. 2).

“In late October, a Mississippi jury ordered three firms, including oil-services giant Halliburton and manufacturer 3M, to pay six plaintiffs $25 million apiece. …What made jaws drop was that the plaintiffs weren’t even sick–their X-rays just showed they stood an increased chance of getting sick. ‘Most of these guys have not missed a day of work in their lives,’ their lawyer said. … To unearth new clients for lawyers, screening firms advertise in towns with many aging industrial workers or park X-ray vans near union halls. To get a free X-ray, workers must often sign forms giving law firms 40 percent of any recovery. One solicitation reads: ‘Find out if YOU have MILLION DOLLAR LUNGS!’” (”Looking for some million-dollar lungs”, U.S. News, Dec. 17).

Some say asbestos defendants should try to avoid angering juries by paying claims without a fight, but an attorney for power plant maker Babcock & Wilcox said an uncritical approach to claims had proved too expensive for his now-bankrupt client: “In the past, you literally filled out a form in five minutes that stated the claimant had a note from the doctor saying he was coughing and had other symptoms and showed that he worked at the site. It took five to 10 minutes to fill out the form that would routinely lead to checks for thousands of dollars.” (Terry Brennan, “Firms Wary of Challenging Asbestos Claims”, The Deal, Nov. 13). And battling continues in a case (see Feb. 12-13) in which B&W and other asbestos defendants have attempted to turn the tables on leading plaintiff’s firms, arguing that they have violated racketeering laws by coaching clients’ testimony and by threatening retaliation against companies that seek a legislative solution to the litigation morass. (Mark Hamblett, “Asbestos Companies Bring RICO Suit Against Plaintiffs’ Firms”, New York Law Journal, Sept. 6). This spring defendant law firms won a court order prohibiting the plaintiff companies from questioning their former, as well as their current, employees without counsel being present — i.e., even if the former employees are eager to spill the beans they will not be allowed to do so except in the presence of someone representing their former employer. That certainly should put a chill on whistleblowing (Mark Hamblett, “Employees of Law Firms Charged With Racketeering Shielded From Interviews Without Counsel”, New York Law Journal, April 11).

Plus: Dallas alt-weekly Observer, which had run some of the best journalism on the Baron & Budd client-coaching asbestos scandal, returned with a terrific follow-up in March which we’ve unconscionably delayed in linking (Thomas Korosec, “Homefryin’ with Fred Baron”, Dallas Observer, March 29). (DURABLE LINK)

December 10 – Steve Chapman on military tribunals. “President Bush has provoked a storm of criticism by authorizing special military tribunals to try terrorists caught in our war against al Qaeda. Some of the complaints, dealing with the specific rules and procedures that the administration proposes, are worth considering. But other gripes seem to miss the crucial point that war is vastly different from law enforcement. ” (Chicago Tribune/ TownHall, Dec. 6).

December 10 – Love contracts. Some lawyers continue to advise employers to get co-workers who are in amorous relationships to sign legal documents affirming that the liaison is indeed voluntary, and that they will not harass each other if it ends. A 1998 survey by the Society for Human Resource Management “found that while 88 percent of the companies that discourage workplace romances do so out of fear of sexual harassment claims, just 4 percent of such relationships resulted in claims that led to litigation.” We don’t know where that “just” comes from — a 4 percent risk of getting the employer dragged into court sounds pretty serious to us. (Torri Minton, “Caught in the pact — Couples involved in office dalliances required to sign ‘love contract’”, San Francisco Chronicle, Dec. 2). (DURABLE LINK)

December 10 – “Saudi Arabia finally gets tough on terrorism!” “We are fighting a holy war to eradicate the source of the biggest corruption on earth,” says Saudi lawyer Ahmad al-Tuwarjiri, but it turns out he’s talking about … tobacco companies, who he’s suing in a legal action in Riyadh. (Frank Gardner, “Saudi hospital fights tobacco ‘terrorists’”, BBC, Dec. 4, via Untold Millions weblog, Dec. 5) (see Nov. 16, 2000 — we’re not sure what became of that earlier action, but suspect that it didn’t fare well, since the action’s now moving to Riyadh). (DURABLE LINK)

December 7-9 – Counterterrorism agents, on their own. Gabriel Schoenfeld, writing in Commentary: “Last year, at the behest of Congress, the National Commission on Terrorism, a body of leading experts, issued findings” on U.S. vulnerability to terrorist attack. Among other problems it warned of: the nation lacks adequate counterterrorist efforts, including intelligence monitoring of terrorist groups. “According to the commission, the guidelines governing the recruitment of ‘unsavory’ sources, introduced by the Clinton administration in 1995, had created a climate within the CIA that was ‘overly risk-averse’ and that contributed ‘to a marked decline in agency morale unparalleled since the 1970s.’ That is bad enough; but the morale problem had sources beyond the restrictive guidelines. Again according to the commission, some CIA officers and FBI special agents were being ’sued individually’ by terrorist suspects for actions taken in the course of their officially sanctioned duties. Instead of representing them in such suits, the government was letting the agents fend for themselves; those who chose to stay on the job were being forced to purchase personal-liability insurance to cover their legal bills.

“Did the commission call for an end to this preposterous state of affairs, whereby accused terrorists have been able to turn the tables on their pursuers and bring them to court? Not at all. It asked only that the government provide ‘full reimbursement of the costs of personal-liability insurance.’” (”Could September 11 Have Been Averted?”, Commentary, December (scroll to near end)).

December 7-9 – Overlawyered schools roundup. A judge has thrown out Desiree Radford’s suit claiming that it was unlawful for the city of Buffalo to lay off teachers in her son’s district without first conducting an environmental impact statement (”Judge Dismisses Mother’s Case To Stop Buffalo Teacher Layoffs”, WGRZ.com, undated). In Ohio, the case of Fairview High School junior Aaron Petitt, “who claimed he was denied freedom of speech and due process when he received a 10-day suspension for hanging posters of airplanes bombing Afghanistan on his student locker,” is ending with a denouement summed up in the Cleveland paper’s headline: “District settles case with student; he gets $2,000, lawyers $21,000″. Aaron’s lawyers are charging local taxpayers $300 an hour for their services. (Sarah Treffinger, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Dec. 1). Schools in Canada’s largest city will probably wind up in court because of an effort to raise standards: “A Toronto parent group concerned about Ontario’s tough new school curriculum will encourage parents to take legal action against the government if their children are suffering under the revamped standards.” (Lee-Anne Goodman, “Toronto parent group encourages legal action”, Canadian Press/Toronto Sun, Dec. 2). And attorney Susanna Dokupil comments on the don’t- read- grades- aloud- in- class case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court. (”Hey, Congress, Leave Us Kids Alone”, The American Enterprise, Nov. 29) (see Nov. 28). (DURABLE LINK)

December 7-9 – “Hell’s litigious angels”. John Leo’s annual who’s-a-victim roundup leads off with the touchy motorcyclists who want protected-group status in discrimination law: “America’s next official victim group may be roaring your way on their Harley-Davidsons.” (U.S. News, Dec. 10; Chris Weinkopf, “Born To Be Mild”, FrontPage, Nov. 28; see Nov. 19-20). The Boston Globe’s Jeff Jacoby thinks this would be a good time to take a stand on behalf of the principle of freedom of association: “Bikers Demand Their ‘Civil Rights’”, Nov. 29, via Center-Right).

December 7-9 – Chrysler dodges a $250 million dart. Blessed with a favorable appellate circuit (the Fourth) and high-powered counsel (Ted Olson, now solicitor general, and Theodore Boutrous of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher), DaimlerChrysler has managed to get a $250 million South Carolina punitive award overturned. “The court also reversed and remanded for retrial the jury’s finding of liability and its award of [$12.5 million] compensatory damages, finding that Chrysler should have been able to introduce evidence that a child who was ejected from a Chrysler minivan was not wearing a seat belt.” (”Chrysler Escapes $250 Million in Punitives”, National Law Journal, Nov. 1). San Francisco Chronicle legal columnist Reynolds Holding says the disparate fate of punitive damages on appeal in different cases — $5 billion against ExxonMobil held excessive in the Valdez spill case, $25 million upheld against Philip Morris in a case brought by an individual smoker– suggests that critics of punitive awards may have a point about their arbitrariness: would anyone have been especially surprised had the outcome been reversed and the tobacco maker rather than Exxon had gotten its award reduced? (”Scales of justice out of whack”, Nov. 25). And if you still thought plaintiffs in our legal system bore the burden of proving their legal case, get with it: “The New Jersey state judiciary has issued model civil jury charges that implement a new standard of proof in automobile crashworthiness cases, making it clear that automakers now have the burden of proving their vehicles provide occupants adequate protection.” (Charles Toutant, “New Jersey Shifts Burden of Proof in Auto Design Cases”, New Jersey Law Journal, Sept. 11).

December 5-6 – Cosseted to distraction. New Jersey has made itself “the darling of child-safety advocates” by becoming the first state to adopt a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recommendation that children in cars be required to ride in booster seats until they weigh 80 pounds or reach their eighth birthday. But even some conscientious parents say the new law goes too far: older kids rebel at being forced back into “baby” seating, carpools break up as adult co-workers shun the nannyized vehicles, besides which the devices cost good money. (Kaitlin Gurney, “Tough N.J. safety-seat law poses dilemmas”, Philadelphia Inquirer, Nov. 30). And the Washington Times reports a presumably unintended consequence of those red-light cameras that revenue-hungry municipalities have installed to generate citations: “Some D.C. police officers say they are slowing their response to emergencies because photo-radar cameras are ticketing them for speeding … They said they and other officers have been forced to pay the fines, and are now on edge about speeding to a crime scene and running red lights in emergencies.” (Brian DeBose, “Cops get speeding tickets from cameras”, Nov. 29).

December 5-6 – “Victims of Day-Trader Rampage Say Industry Itself to Blame”. Two years ago financially ruined day trader Mark Barton walked into two office buildings in the Buckhead section of Atlanta and massacred nine persons. Now lawyers, “arguing that Georgia tort law should evolve with the times,” are hoping to put the day-trading segment of the securities industry on trial, saying that the volatile and risky nature of its business made such a crime foreseeable. (Trisha Renaud, Fulton County Daily Report, Nov. 30). Update Jan. 9-10, 2002: judge dismisses suit against building owners and managers, but lets it go forward against two day-trading firms. (see further updateDec. 19, 2003)

December 5-6 – “EU considers plans to outlaw racism”. Free speech for me, but not for thee: “Racism and xenophobia would become serious crimes in Britain for the first time, carrying a prison sentence of two years or more, under new proposals put forward by Brussels … [the ban includes] a wide range of activities that sometimes fall into the sphere of protected political speech, such as ‘public insults’ of minority groups, ‘public condoning of war crimes’, and ‘public dissemination of tracts, pictures, or other material containing expressions of racism of xenophobia’ — including material posted on far-Right internet websites.” The “plans, drafted by the European Commission, define racism and xenophobia as aversion to individuals based on ‘race, colour, descent, religion or belief, national or ethnic origin’”. (Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, Daily Telegraph, Nov. 29). In The American Prospect, Wendy Kaminer discusses the suit filed in August against America Online for allegedly allowing participants in its chat rooms to engage in “hate speech” against Muslims: “Virtual Offensiveness”, Nov. 19 (see Sept. 3).

December 5-6 – Attorney can sue for being called “fixer”. A federal judge has ruled that Pennsylvania attorney Richard Sprague can proceed with his defamation lawsuit against the American Bar Association and its magazine, the ABA Journal, which had called him a “fixer”. Although writers often employ that term to describe the sort of political wheeler-dealer who uses connections in a perfectly lawful way to resolve people’s problems, the judge found the term might also evoke an impression that Sprague improperly “fixed” cases. (Shannon P. Duffy, “Lawyer’s Defamation Claim Against ABA Found Valid”, The Legal Intelligencer, Nov. 19). Update Nov. 30, 2003: case settles for undisclosed sum and half-page apology.

December 5-6 – Resources: terrorism and the law. Some useful jumping-off points for research and reading: Jurist; FindLaw; Federalist Society briefing papers; Brookings; New Yorker.

December 4 – There’ll always be a California. It’s a state of mind, really:

* In a notice letter sent to Nestlé, Tootsie Roll Industries Inc., Godiva and numerous other confectioners including local favorites Ghirardelli and See’s, attorney Roger Carrick of Los Angeles’s Carrick Law Group has charged the companies with violating the state’s Proposition 65 right-to-know law by failing to post warning labels on chocolate advising consumers that it contains toxic substances such as lead and cadmium. Michele Corash, a Morrison & Foerster lawyer defending Hershey and Mars in the controversy, says the Food and Drug Administration has called chocolate harmless: “What Mr. Carrick is complaining about is tiny amounts of trace minerals that are present in virtually all foods. They are in the soil, and foods that are grown in soil absorb them.” Carrick says it hasn’t been proven that all the lead and cadmium content are from natural sources, but even trial- lawyer- friendly California AG Bill Lockyer has weighed in on the side of the candy makers. (John Rosmer, “Chocolate: It’s Fattening, but Is It Toxic?”, San Francisco Daily Journal, Oct. 29, not online; Dan Evans, “Death by chocolate?”, San Francisco Examiner, Nov. 26). And Forbes explains how Prop 65 has made it possible for bounty-hunting lawyers to do very well: “Visit any doctor or dentist in California. If you don’t see signs warning you that the physician is using potentially harmful chemicals as defined by the state’s Proposition 65 (e.g., mercury fillings), haul him into court and demand $2,500 for each day he didn’t post the warnings. You get 25% of the loot, the state 75%”. (Dorothy Pomerantz, “Toxic Avengers”, Forbes, Oct. 15).

* You may have thought your home belonged to you, but some disabled-rights activists have other plans for it: “In what would be the first such rules in the nation, Santa Monica officials are considering a proposal to require that all privately built new homes and those undergoing major remodeling have a wheelchair ramp entry, wide interior hallways and at least one handicapped-accessible bathroom.” (Bob Pool, “Wheelchair Access as a Must for Residences”, L.A. Times, Dec. 2).

* “Richard Espinosa, whose assistance dog allegedly was attacked by the [Escondido] Public Library’s pet cat last year, filed a lawsuit against the city yesterday seeking $1.5 million in damages.” (see May 7 and (letter from Espinosa) June 13) (& see Apr. 15, 2002) (John Behrman, “$1.5 Million Suit Filed in Library Cat Case”, San Diego Union Tribune, Nov. 28).

December 4 – An ill wind. Among those prospering in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks: employment lawyers, whose phones may ring nonstop in a time of mass layoffs. (”Layoff Lessons”, Corporate Counsel, Nov. 21). Garry Mathiason of the management-side firm Littler Mendelson says that in addition to that, his firm “has three key advantages: sex, drugs and violence” — all sources of legal risk for employers. (Krysten Crawford, “Littler’s Labors”, The Recorder, Nov. 20).

December 4 – Headline of the day. “Sept. 11 Laws Raise Fears of Tort Reform” — Bob Van Voris, National Law Journal, Nov. 27. Love that “fears”. The NLJ does know its audience, doesn’t it?

December 3 – Can’t do anything but legislate. Some constituents are furious at Pennsylvania state representative Jane Baker, a Republican, after learning that her lawyers have filed papers in a car-accident case portraying her as “virtually unemployable” aside from her lawmaking job. “In a televised debate last fall, Baker assured viewers that, both physically and mentally, she was up to the task of representing them in Harrisburg. Asked directly if she could read and comprehend well, she replied, ‘I’m fine.’ She went on to say that a physical injury to her left arm ‘appears to be permanent, but otherwise … I’m ready to go to work’ in Harrisburg.

“Legal papers Baker filed last month paint a dramatically different portrait. If not re-elected, Baker claimed Oct. 19 in legal papers tied to her case, she will be ‘virtually unemployable’ because of her condition, which includes physical and ‘multiple cognitive defects’ that include problems remembering and recollecting what she has read.’” Baker’s suit is demanding $7.5 million in damages from Judith V. Fulmer, “a former friend who pleaded guilty to drunken driving and leaving the scene of an accident” after police say her vehicle struck Baker as she walked along a country road. (Mario Cattabiani, “Baker’s lawsuit puzzles some”, Allentown Morning Call, Nov. 4).

December 3 – “Terrorists push plots from jail”. It’s practically a tradition for American inmates to continue running criminal enterprises from their cells, but the stakes have gotten higher: investigators now realize that Mideast terrorists locked up in American prisons have repeatedly managed to communicate with outside followers to approve and even help plan further murderous attacks. The Bush administration on Oct. 31 announced a new practice of listening in on conversations between detainees and their attorneys when it determines there is “reasonable suspicion” that such communications are related to future terrorist acts; Attorney General John Ashcroft says that there are only 13 persons in custody — at the moment — for whom it would like to use such power. The detainees and their attorneys are to be advised of the monitoring, and a “privilege team” is supposed to screen the resulting information so that it does not reach the eyes of prosecutors or regular investigators. American Bar Association president Robert A. Hirshon says such monitoring is constitutional only if a judge approves it in advance under a probable-cause standard, and Senate Judiciary chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) also views the new practice as “unacceptable” in its current form. (Cam Simpson, Chicago Tribune, Nov. 19; Pete Yost, “Ashcroft Defends Monitoring of Inmate-Attorney Conversations”, AP/Law.com, Nov. 13; Tom Gede, Kent Scheidegger and William Otis, “Monitoring Attorney-Client Communications of Designated Federal Prisoners”, Federalist Society National Security White Papers, Dec. 3).

December 3 – Lending rules trip up litigation-finance firms. Class-action lawyers have repeatedly tripped up financial services firms by arguing in court that transactions characterized as cash advances (such as “rapid refunds” that tax-preparing companies issue before the actual IRS check arrives) are in reality loans, leaving companies liable if they have not made the full range of disclosures required by truth-in-lending law (see, for example, Apr. 5). So some might see a kind of poetic justice in the news from Ohio, where an appellate court has “ruled that two companies that advance money to personal injury plaintiffs on the understanding that they will be repaid only if the plaintiffs prevail, are making loans — not ‘contingent advances’ — and violated state usury and lender- registration laws.” Every so often, surprising as it may seem, the litigation community does wind up having to live by the same rules it prescribes for the rest of us. (Gary Young, “Ohio Court Rules Against Litigation-Loan Firm in Usury Case”, National Law Journal, Nov. 16) (see also letter to the editor, Oct. 22).

Tagged as: asbestos, Atlanta, attorneys general, bankruptcy, Bill Lockyer, Buffalo, Canada, Chrysler, Cleveland, Dallas, Detroit, Europe, Exxon, Fred Baron, free speech, hospitals, libel slander and defamation, Mississippi, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Prop 65, San Diego, Saudi Arabia, South Carolina, tobacco

{ 1 comment }

← Previous Entries

Bill Lockyer

Regulating potato chip recipes

“Judge tosses global warming lawsuit against car makers”

And more May 17 updates

Not your usual AG candidate

Lockyer flayed on autos-’n'-global-warming suit

Calif. AG sues automakers for global warming

Help wanted (Calif. shakedown practice)?

AG Lockyer joins California french-fry suit

Update: smog fee lawyers snag $23.7 million

Lockyer to sue grocery chains

Tobacco: AGs push Hollywood self-censorship

El Paso case: $60 m payday for Lockyer chums

Archived environment items, pre-July 2003

March 2003 archives, part 1

January 2003 archives, part 2

April 2002 archives, part 1

March 2002 archives, part 2

December 2001 archives, part 1

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Point of Law

Volokh

Search

Media Bloggers Association

CPSIA

Favorites

Learn More/Reform

Misc.

Navigation

Other blogs

Other law blogs

Personalities

Topics

Archives

Meta