Looks like we’ll be hearing a lot more about the “Kivalina” (Alaskan Inupiat village) climate-change suit:

Over time, the two trial lawyers [Stephen Susman of Texas and Steve Berman of Seattle, both familiar to longterm readers of this site] have become convinced that they have the playbook necessary to win big cases against the country’s largest emitters. It’s the same game plan that brought down Big Tobacco. And in Kivalina — where the link between global warming and material damage is strong—they believe they’ve found the perfect challenger.

In February, Berman and Susman—along with two attorneys who have previously worked on behalf of the village and an environmental lawyer specializing in global warming—filed suit in federal court against 24 oil, coal, and electric companies, claiming that their emissions are partially responsible for the coastal destruction in Kivalina. More important, the suit also accuses eight of the firms (American Electric Power, BP America, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Duke Energy, ExxonMobil, Peabody Energy, and Southern Company) of conspiring to cover up the threat of man-made climate change, in much the same way the tobacco industry tried to conceal the risks of smoking—by using a series of think tanks and other organizations to falsely sow public doubt in an emerging scientific consensus.

(Stephan Faris, “Conspiracy Theory”, The Atlantic, June). For the theory of legally wrongful participation in public debate (as one might call it), as it surfaced in the tobacco litigation, see, for example, this 2006 post.

More background on the suit at the Native American Rights Fund’s blog, here and here, and at attorney Matthew Pawa’s site. Carter Wood at NAM “Shop Floor” links to a report by the American Justice Partnership and Southeastern Legal Foundation (PDF) entitled, “The Most Dangerous Litigation in America: Kivalina“.

Yet more: Northwestern lawprof David Dana has a working paper at SSRN entitled “The Mismatch between Public Nuisance Law and Global Warming” (via Sheila Scheuerman/TortsProf). Abstract:

The federal courts using the common law method of case-by-case adjudication may have institutional advantages over the more political branches, such as perhaps more freedom from interest group capture and more flexibility to tailor decisions to local conditions. Any such advantages, however, are more than offset by the disadvantages of relying on the courts in common resource management in general and in the management of the global atmospheric commons in particular. The courts are best able to serve a useful function resolving climate-related disputes once the political branches have acted by establishing a policy framework and working through the daunting task of allocating property or quasi-property rights in greenhouse gas emissions. In the meantime, states do have a state legislative alternative that is preferable to common law suits, and that federal courts can facilitate without any dramatic innovations in federal preemption or dormant commerce clause doctrine.

In Alaska; Chevron; climate change; environment; Exxon; global warming; Kivalina; Seattle; stephen susman; Steve Berman; tobacco

It’s like magic, we’ll just make Big Business pay:

Washington, D.C., lawyer Thomas Fay has spent years hounding the Libyan government for money on behalf of victims of terrorist attacks. Now he’s hoping to collect — from American companies.

Fay has sent letters to 13 brand-name corporations, including Exxon Mobil and Chevron, notifying them that if he wins his case against Libya, he’ll be coming after them. He has even sent one to White & Case, the prominent law firm that recently signed on to defend Libya.

The gambit stems from a change in the law meant to make it easier for plaintiffs to secure judgments and collect from countries found responsible for sponsoring terrorist attacks. Until recently, those who had prevailed in court had few options for collecting.

But on Jan. 28, President George W. Bush signed a bill amending the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act to allow plaintiffs to seek any asset owned by the terrorist-sponsoring country in reach of American courts, including frozen accounts or property managed by others. The amendment also permits victims to request punitive damages, which they couldn’t before, and eliminates some avenues for appeal. Under the new law, plaintiffs with pending cases had 60 days to file or refile claims.

Attorney Fay was among those lobbying for the new provision, which was sponsored by Sens. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.). (W.J. Hennigan, Legal Times, Apr. 15).

• “I’ve always thought that promoting yourself as a ‘Super Lawyer’ or ‘Best Lawyer’ was pathetic, self-aggrandizing and meaningless.” [Larry Bodine; Karen Donovan, Portfolio ("cheesiest"); ABA Journal]
• That big campaign by bossy public health groups and tobacco-suit veterans for legal restrictions on fat in the American diet is still with us, even as its scientific credibility falters [Tierney, NYT]
• “1,700 Connecticut Attorneys Suspended Over $110 Bill” — now that sounds like a bargain [ABA Journal]
• Blackwater meets Elmer Gantry? John O’Sullivan shouldn’t plan on being invited to the Edwards inaugural [NRO Corner]
• Nor would it be prudent to invite Felix Salmon and Ben Stein to the same dinner party [Portfolio; more]
• Truly dreadful idea from feminist Northwestern lawprof Kimberly Yuracko: constitution obliges states to ban sexist homeschooling [SSRN via Prawfsblawg; Serious Learning, Ragamuffin Studies, TalkToAction, Marcy Muser]
• New at Point of Law: some results of Tuesday’s election; employers whipsawed on risk of fetal injury; signs of exhaustion at long jury trials; wanna become a law professor?; 9/11 dust injury, or ground-up pills in his bloodstream?; more on Chevron/Texaco and the Ecuador Indians; dept. of New York Times self-parody; and more;
• Lawyer who sued McDonald’s over cheese-allergic client served cheeseburger (Aug. 10, Sept. 1) asks to be released from case, says he’s quitting law practice [LegalNewsLine]
• Of seven leading White House aspirants, all but McCain have law degrees, and all the other six but Romney practiced as lawyers [Liptak, NYT]
• UK: “A lorry driver sentenced to 150 hours’ community service for a drunken racist assault has been let off after probation chiefs claimed the punishment could breach EU working hours limits.” [Daily Mail]
• Notation on Scruggs’s court file: to be “kept away from the press” [five years ago on Overlawyered]

Power tools manufacturer Black & Decker Corp. rejected Victor Breehne for a ”highly wrist-sensitive job” at a Tennessee plant after medical tests suggested that Breehne was vulnerable to carpal-tunnel syndrome. Now he’s suing, charging that the rejection violates the Americans with Disabilities Act:

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has challenged the use of such tests, which aren’t uncommon in manufacturing settings, on ADA grounds. But it lost a federal lawsuit in 2001 against Rockwell Automation Inc. after that company denied jobs to 72 applicants at an Illinois plant.

(Allison Connolly, “B&D sued after it rescinds job offer”, Baltimore Sun, Oct. 16; “Man sues after job offer rescinded over carpal tunnel test”, Reliable Plant, Oct. 17). For the 2002 U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Echabazal v. Chevron, in which the Court (over vociferous protests from some disabled-rights advocates) unanimously ruled that an employer was not obliged to hire a disabled applicant who was at greater risk of injury and death than other workers, see Mar. 1-3, 2002 and links from there.

I’ve got a post at Point of Law detailing a judge’s ruling chastising, and imposing sanctions on, three lawyers (including one who’s fairly famous) who sued the oil company on behalf of supposed cancer victims in Ecuador; it turned out some of the victims 1) didn’t have cancer and 2) weren’t aware a suit was being filed in the U.S. in their name. (Oct. 25; and see Roger Parloff’s excellent post on the episode at Fortune “Legal Pad”).

The AP reports that a “lawsuit seeks what attorneys say could be billions of dollars from a long list of oil companies for damages to wetlands that allegedly would have softened Hurricane Katrina’s blow.” Attorneys from the New Orleans firm of St. Martin & Williams are seeking class-action status on behalf of all persons and entities in Louisiana that suffered injury from Katrina’s wind and storm surge. They’re naming as defendants 11 oil and gas companies including Shell Oil, ExxonMobil, Chevron and BP Corp. whose activities they say depleted marshlands, including by building and neglecting pipeline canals. (AP/Shreveport Times, Sept. 17; “Class-action suit filed against oil companies”, BizNewOrleans.com, Sept. 15).

Meanwhile, environmental litigation over the years aimed at slowing levee and flood-control projects could come under Senate scrutiny, despite peals of protest from the Sierra Club, Sen. Chuck Schumer and others (Dan Eggen, “Senate Panel Investigating Challenges to Levees”, Washington Post, Sept. 17; Jerry Mitchell, “Senate panel investigates levee lawsuits”, Jackson Clarion-Ledger, Sept. 17). See Sept. 9, Sept. 14 (& Baseball Crank).

In 1955, there was a gasoline pipeline leak at the Sunburst Works Refinery that caused minor contamination of a 19-acre underground site. Texaco cleaned the spill at the time, and did further millions of dollars of cleanup starting in 1993. State regulators determined that there was no health effects, and that benzene levels in Sunburst, Montana were no different than in areas unaffected by the spill. The state Department of Environmental Quality ruled that nothing more needed to be done beyond additional monitoring, not least because the groundwater at issue isn’t used for anything–even livestock find it “naturally too briny” to drink.

Not good enough, say some residents and their lawyers, who blame the half-century-old spill for a variety of illnesses from arthritis to mononucleosis. They sued to require additional multi-million dollar cleanup. The plaintiffs originally sought damages for decreased property values, though townpeople who refused to join the lawsuit say that the main cause of the decreased property values is bad publicity from the 2001 lawsuit. (There are only 82 plaintiffs in a town of about 400.) Texaco acknowledges responsibility for the spill, but disputed the need to spend millions more on a clean-up methodology of little efficacy. The judge refused to allow Texaco to introduce evidence that they did exactly what the Montana regulators asked them to do, and a jury awarded a $41 million verdict, including $25 million in punitive damages. Texaco will appeal. The case is important because the verdict could encourage other “double-whammy” lawsuits on companies who have already been spending millions to comply with the extensive state and federal environmental regulations. (Kathleen A. Schultz, “Texaco to appeal Sunburst ruling”, Great Falls Tribune, Aug. 20; “Jury Rules Against ChevronTexaco In Cleanup Suit”, Wall Street Journal, Aug. 20 (sub - $); Reuters, Aug. 20; Kathleen A. Schultz, “Texaco must pay Sunburst $41M”, Aug. 19; Kathleen A. Schultz, “Texaco-Sunburst trial gets under way”, Jul. 26).

A jury had found that the plaintiffs had not suffered compensable damages, but went ahead and awarded $33.8 million in punitives against ChevronTexaco for the actions of a fired salesperson (Jul. 3). The Miami trial judge threw out the award November 12. (Laurie Cunningham, “$33.8M Jury Verdict Against ChevronTexaco Thrown Out”, Miami Daily Business Review, Dec. 1).

A jury found that a plaintiff was not damaged by false promises a former Texaco salesman made (against corporate policy) in selling franchises, but decided that the fact of the promise entitled the plaintiff to $33.8 million in punitive damages. (Why $33.8 million? Because it was a percentage of the size of the defendant’s net value. Strikes me as a punishment for being a successful business, rather than for wrongdoing. If Texaco had taken half of its net value and invested it in a failed fiber optics business, should punitive damages be half as much?) The coverage doesn’t indicate if the promise was written or part of an oral sales pitch, but it does note that the plaintiff did not sue the salesman, who was fired after it was discovered he made such promises. (Matthew Haggman, “ChevronTexaco Subsidiary Hit With $33.8M Punitive Damages Verdict,” Miami Daily Business Review, July 3). Update Dec. 2: award thrown out.

“U.K. roundup” (perennial litigant), Jun. 12-15, 2003.

“‘Resumé spam saddles employers’“, Jun. 3, 2003.

Fair Labor Standards Act, overtime and employee classification suits, 2003: “Schools roundup“, Apr. 9.  2001: “Wal-Mart- as-’cult’-suit: it is about the money“, Jun. 14.  2000: “Goodbye to gaming volunteers?“, Sept. 12 (& update Oct. 3); “Why rush that software project, anyway?” (California overtime law), March 29; “And so now everybody’s happy” (temps fired in wake of Microsoft decision), Feb. 17 (& see letters, Dec. 20); “Strippers in court” (challenge to independent contractor status), Jan. 28; “Microsoft temps can sue for stock options“, Jan. 11. 1999: “Don’t call us professionals!“, Oct. 1-3; “Click here to sue!” (AOL volunteers who want to be recategorized as employees), Sept. 7; “Do as we say (I)” (overtime suit filed against Justice Department on behalf of its own lawyers), Aug. 30; “Click here to sue!” (Seattle law firm offers easy way to sign up for labor law class actions), Aug. 19.

“It ain’t heavy to him, he’s my brother“, May 1-2, 2003; “Firehouse blues” (too-short firefighter), Feb. 20-21, 2002; “Non-pregnant rescuers, please“, Sept. 13, 2001; “Litigators vs. standardized tests, II: who needs sharp cops?“, Feb. 9-11, 2001; “Slow down, it’s just a fire” (Canadian high court strikes down firefighter speed test), Sept. 17-19, 1999; “Perps got away, but equity was served” (Lanning v. SEPTA: challenge to running test given to prospective transit cops), Sept. 15, 1999 (& Oct. 5-7, 2001, Oct. 25-27, 2002).

“U.K.: ‘Killer wrongly sacked for axe attack’“, Apr. 7-8, 2003.

“Maybe crime pays dept.” (annual roundup of weird employment and labor law cases), Apr. 1, 2003.

Their own petard, 2003: “Wellstone campaign didn’t buy worker’s comp for its employees“, Feb. 6-9. 2002: “‘Civil Rights Agency Retaliated Against Worker, EEOC Rules’“, Jun. 14-16; “‘Disability rights attorney accused of having inaccessible office’“, Apr. 25. 2001: “EEOC sued for age bias“, Mar. 6.  2000: “White House pastry chef harassment suit“, Sept. 18.  1999: “Do as we say (I)” (overtime suit filed against Justice Department on behalf of its own lawyers), Aug. 30 (more).

“Race-bias cases gone wrong“, Jan. 24-26, 2003.

“Vt. high court: ALL-CAPS DISCLAIMER on front page of employee handbook not unambiguous enough“, Jan. 17-19, 2003.

“Ninth Circuit panel sniffs collusion in bias settlement fees“, Dec. 16-17, 2002.

Public employee entrenchment, 2002: “Munched zoo animals, gets six months severance” (Germany), Nov. 8-10; “Convicted, but still on their teaching jobs“, Jul. 10-11; “School told to rehire cocaine abuser“, Mar. 20-21.  2001: “‘Poor work tolerated, employees say’“, Nov. 15.  2000: “Reprimand ‘very serious’ for teacher” (had given 11-year-old girl money to buy marijuana), June 27; “‘Foreman who slept on job wins reinstatement’“, June 7; “From the labor arbitration front” (disallowed firing of Ct. town employee who pleaded no contest to larceny), March 28;  “Not to be dismissed” (unfireable workers, Canada and U.K.), Feb. 25. 1999: “Better than reading a lunchtime novel” (IRS employee sues; fired for accessing taxpayers’ personal returns 476 times), Oct. 25; “Undislodgeable educators” (teacher peer review undermined by tenure legalities), Aug. 18.

“‘Nannies to sue for racial bias’” (U.K.), Oct. 30-31, 2002.

“Looking back on EEOC v. Sears” (sex discrimination, statistics and history), Oct. 28-29, 2002.

Appearance and authenticity, 2002: “‘Demand for more ugly people on TV’” (Norway: higher “ugly quotas” sought), Oct. 21. 2001: “Facial-jewelry discrimination charged“, Jul. 2; “Pregnant actress complains at being denied virgin role“, Jun. 21; “‘Fired transsexual dancers out for justice’“, Mar. 23-25.  2000: “Appearance-blind hiring?“, Dec. 26-29; “Latest female Santa case“, Dec. 13-14 (and see Dec. 18-19); “Wal-Mart wins female Santa case“, Oct. 12; “Next: gender-blind stage casting?” (theme restaurant’s hiring of males as “riverboat tough” food servers), Mar. 24-26.

“U.K.: ‘Dr. Botch’ sues hospital for wrongful dismissal“, Oct. 18-20, 2002; “Let them sue us!” (hospitals get sued if they withdraw privileges from questionable doctors), Mar. 23, 2000.

“‘Inundations of electronic resumes pose problems for employers’“, Oct. 16-17, 2002.

“Latest sacked-Santa suit“, Oct. 9-10, 2002 (& Dec. 13-14 and Oct. 12, 2000)

“Right to break workplace rules and then return“, Sept. 16-17, 2002.

“Personal responsibility roundup” (workers’ comp told to compensate worker for his suicide attempt), Sept. 12, 2002; “‘Court upholds workers compensation for drunk, injured worker’“, April 6-8, 2001.

National origin, language on the job, 2002: “Hiring apple pickers = racketeering“, Sept. 9-10; “‘Surgeon halts operation over foreign nurses’ poor English’“, Jul. 25; “No ‘flood’ of Muslim or Arab discrimination complaints“, Jun. 17-18; “Must-know-Spanish rules defended“, May 28-29; “High court nixes back pay for illegal aliens“, Apr. 3-4.  2001: “Sued if you do dept.: language in the workplace“, Dec. 19 (& Nov. 17, 1999); “Competitor can file RICO suit over hiring of illegal aliens“, Dec. 13-14; “Opponents of profiling, still in the driver’s seat“, Nov. 2-4; “Employee’s right to jubilate over Sept. 11 attack“, Oct. 9 (& letters, Oct. 22). 2000: Christian Science Monitor on accent discrimination, see Dec. 18-19; “Green cards gather moss” (immigration delays), Feb. 4; “Back pay obtained for illegal aliens“, Jan. 10 (& Oct. 28, 1999).  1999: “52 green-card pickup” (rules against asking for too much documentation of citizenship in hiring), Oct. 29; “Say what?” (accent), Reason, November 1997.

“Ambulance driver who broke for doughnuts entitled to sue“, Nov. 2-4, 2001 (& Jun. 28-30, 2002).

“Not worth the hassle?” (Home Depot tries to avoid federal contractor status), Jun. 17-18, 2002.

“Advertisement for ‘friendly’ employee deemed discriminatory“, Jun. 10, 2002.

“Catharine MacKinnon, call your office“, May 16, 2002.

“Soap star: ABC wrote my character out of the show” (”medical leave” for drug rehab), Apr. 10, 2002.

“Will EU silence the pipes?” (occupational noise regulation), Mar. 8-10, 2002; “Britain’s delicate soldiery“, Dec. 22-25, 2000.

Retaliation: “Inability to get along with co-workers” (employer’s counterclaim as retaliation), Mar. 8-10, 2002; “Latest lose-on-substance, win-on-retaliation case“, Oct. 16, 2001; “Latest lose-on-substance, win-on-retaliation employment claim“, Jan. 25, 2000; “Employment-law retaliation: real frogs from ‘totally bogus’ gardens“, Sept. 29, 1999.

“Aerobics studio mustn’t favor the svelte“, Feb. 27-28, 2002 (& update May 10-12).

“Jarring discord” (Audubon String Quartet), June 5, 2000 (& June 14, 2001, Nov. 13, 2001, May 10-12, 2002).

“European workplace notes“, Feb. 25-26, 2002.

“‘The Enron mythos’” (employee compensation, 401(k)), Feb. 15-17, 2002.

“Sept. 11 and court awards” (price, payouts of employment liability insurance soar), Jan. 14-15, 2002; “‘Workers win more lawsuits, awards’“, March 29, 2001.

“‘UK women can demand to know men’s salaries’“, Dec. 28, 2001-Jan. 1, 2002.

“Menace of office-park geese“, Dec. 13-14, 2001.

“‘Halliburton shares plunge on verdict’” (law-firm whistleblowing), Dec. 10, 2001.

“An ill wind” (layoffs mean prosperity for employment lawyers), Dec. 4, 2001.

“Rejecting an Apple windfall” (race discrimination suit), Nov. 30-Dec. 2, 2001.

“Sued if you do dept.: co-worker’s claim of rape“, Nov. 7-8, 2001.

“In the mean time, let them breathe spores” (OSHA and anthrax), Nov. 6, 2001.

“Judge may revive ‘Millionaire’ ADA case” (Echabazal v. Chevron: employer’s right to turn away workers who would be injured by job), Nov. 5, 2001.

“‘Attorney Ordered To Pay Fees for “Rambo” Tactics’“, Oct. 5-7, 2001; “Even the chance of loser-pays helps keep ‘em honest” (pilots’ union bid for back pay), August 12, 1999.

“Employment class actions: EEOC to the rescue“, Sept. 10, 2001.

“Not discriminatory to kick sleeping worker’s chair” (includes item on U.K. employee privacy), Sept. 3, 2001.

“Firefighter’s demand: back pay for time facing criminal rap“, Aug. 29-30, 2001.

“Negligent to lack employee spouse-abuse policy?“, Aug. 29-30, 2001.

“N.J. court declares transsexuals protected class“, July 30, 2001; “‘Fired transsexual dancers out for justice’“, March 23-25, 2001; “Columnist-fest” (transgender employee sues over no-skirt order), May 31, 2000.

Age discrimination law: “Research for lawyers, courtesy of their targets“, July 6-8, 2001; “EEOC sued for age bias“, March 6, 2001; “‘Toronto Torch’ age-bias suit” (stripper), May 23, 2000; “Take the settlement, sue anyway“, March 13; “‘Tenure Gridlock: When Professors Choose Not To Retire’“, March 3-5; “‘The case for age discrimination’“, Jan. 20, 2000; “Age-bias law expands” (Calif., N.J. developments), Aug. 12, 1999.

“Court says tipsy topless dancer can sue club“, Jul. 3-4, 2001.

“‘Hearsay harassment’ not actionable“, Jun. 12, 2001.

“Dispatches from abroad” (U.K. policeman claims snoring resulted from inhalation of cannabis), May 28, 2001.

“Six-hour police standoff no grounds for loss of job, says employee“, May 21, 2001.

“Letter to the editor” (arbitration agreements), Apr. 16, 2001.

“Comparable worth in Maine” (state enacts “pay equity”), April 20-22, 2001; “Comparable worth: it’s back“, May 17, 2000.

“‘2000’s Ten Wackiest Employment Lawsuits’“, Apr. 13-15, 2001.

“‘Kava tea drinker alleges bias in FedEx firing’“, Mar. 19-20, 2001.

Ergonomics: “Narrow escape from ergonomic regs“, March 9-11, 2001; “‘Cop’s claim: gun belt too heavy’“, Feb. 23-25, 2001; “Born to regulate“, June 28, 2000; “Go ahead and comment — if it’ll do much good” (OSHA ergonomics regulations), March 17-19, 2000; “Repetitive motion injury Hall of Fame” (phone sex operator), Nov. 22, 1999.

“Forbidden paint zone” (New York City schools’ 10-foot rule), Feb. 27, 2001.

“Employees not tenured in California“, Feb. 7-8, 2001.

“Digital serfs?“, Jan. 26-28, 2001.

“‘Firms mum on troubled workers’“, Jan. 22-23, 2001.

Police-record discrimination: “Coming soon to a school near you” (applicant with police record OK’d since no convictions), Jan. 17, 2001; “‘Killer’s suit alleges job discrimination’“, Jan. 15, 2001; “You were negligent to hire me” (undisclosed rape-related conviction), May 30, 2000; “Hire that felon, or else“  (Wisc. law protects felons from job discrimination), Jan. 7, 2000 (& earlier commentary: Sept. 24, 1999).

“Stressed out in New Hampshire” (stress from legitimate workplace criticism triggers workers’ comp), Jan. 4, 2000; “Stress of listening to clients’ problems” (masseuse wins benefits), June 21, 2000; “Weekend reading” (workplace psychological injury claims), July 31-August 1, 1999.

Damages, big numbers: “Big numbers” (Kroger Co. hit for $55 million after workplace accident), April 16, 2001; “Property taxes triple after wrongful-termination suit“, Dec. 20, 2000; “‘Stock Options: A Gold Mine for Racial-Discrimination Suits?’“, Dec. 11-12; “How to succeed in business?” (Christian Curry case), Nov. 20; “Wonder Bread hierarchy too white, suit charges“, July 10 (updates Aug. 4: jury awards $132 M damages and Oct. 10: judge cuts award by $97 M); “Penalty for co.’s schedule inflexibility: 30 years’ front pay” (ADA), June 16-18; “Record employment verdict thrown out” (Lane v. Hughes Aircraft), March 9, 2000; “From our mail sack: memoir of a morsel” (Calif. employer’s story), Nov. 24-25, 1999; “The stuffed-grape-leaf standard” (litigator says $300K isn’t that much money), August 14-15, 1999.

“Promising areas for suits” (broken interview promises, third party suits to sidestep workers’ comp limits), Dec. 7, 2000.

“‘Company Is Told to Stay and Face New Union’“, Nov. 24-26, 2000; “NLRB lurches left”, Oct. 11, 2000.

“Obese soldiers class action“, Nov. 10-12, 2000.

“New unfairness for old” (Employment Non-Discrimination Act), Oct. 26, 2000.

“Prospect of injury no reason not to hire” (ADA), July 5, 2000; and see disabled-rights page.

“Judge tells EEOC to pay employer’s fees“, Oct. 5, 2000.

“When sued, be sure to respond” (Wal-Mart transsexual employee), Jul. 21-23, 2000 (update Sept. 6-7: judge grants retrial after default judgment).

“EEOC: offbeat beliefs may be protected against workplace bias“, Sept. 5, 2000.

“Losing your legislative battles?  Just sue instead” (contraception coverage by employer health plans), July 26-27, 2000.

Coke: “‘Coca-Cola settles race suit’“, Nov. 17-19, 2000; “Class-action lawyers to Coke clients: you’re fired“, Jul. 21-23; “‘Coke plaintiff eavesdrops on lawyers; case unravels’“, Jul. 19-20; “‘Ad deal links Coke, lawyer in suit’” (Willie Gary, suing Coke on behalf of clients, enters into a lucrative ad deal with it), May 11, 2000.

“Chutzpah is. . .” (marital-status discrimination case by boss’s ex-son-in-law), Jul. 18, 2000.

“Welcome readers” (CNNfn article advising workers thinking of suing employers; cites this site), Jun. 19, 2000; “Favorite bookmark” (head of Employment Policy Foundation likes this site), May 23, 2000.

“Look for the Kiwi label” (sweatshops), Jun. 9-11, 2000.

“Another Mr. Civility nominee” (associate at law firm asks for bonus, is fired), June 2-4, 2000; “Smudged plumage” (Angelos’s Orioles won’t hire Cuban defectors), May 24, 2000.

“Funny hats and creative drawing“, May 1, 2000.

“Employer-based health coverage in retreat?“, Mar. 31-April 2, 2000.

OSHA and at-home workers: “OSHA & telecommuters: the long view“, April 7-9, 2000; “Update: OSHA in full retreat on home office issue“, Jan. 29-30; “OSHA at-home worker directive“, Jan. 8-9; “OSHA backs off on home-office regulation“, Jan. 6; “Beyond parody: ‘OSHA Covers At-Home Workers’“, Jan. 5, 2000.

“Feds’ mission: target Silicon Valley for race complaints“, Feb. 29, 2000.

“Judgment reversed in Seinfeld case“, Feb. 26-27, 2000.

“Private job bias lawsuits tripled in 1990s“, Jan. 19, 2000; “Employee lawsuits increasing” (Society for Human Resource Management survey), August 25, 1999.

“Warn and be sued” (industrial psychologist found liable for warning co-workers of patient’s violent fantasies), Jan. 12, 2000; “Indications of turbulence” (pilot whose mental fitness for duty was challenged wins partial back pay), Dec. 1, 1999.

“Christmas lawyer humor” (”Restructuring at the North Pole” parody), Dec. 23-26, 1999.

“Truth in recruitment?” (N.J. jury verdict), Dec. 17-18, 1999.

“From the quote file” (Legal Times: U.S. Supreme Court as nation’s chief human resources manager), Dec. 15, 1999.

Under surveillance at work? “Hold your e-tongue” (employee emails), Nov. 9, 1999; “EEOC encourages anonymous harassment complaints“, Sept. 3; “Please — there are terminals present” (email censorship and harassment law), July 30; “‘Destroy privacy expectations: lawyer’” (advice managers are getting), July 26, 1999.

“Bring a long book” (New York takes average of seven years to adjudicate discrimination complaints), Nov. 4, 1999.

“Perkiness a prerequisite?” (bias suit says employer wanted workers to look like “Doris Day or the boy next door”), Nov. 2, 1999.

“New Jersey court system faces employment complaint“, Oct. 21, 1999.

“Blackboard jungle” (Ann Arbor, Mich. substitute teachers’ suit gets $30 million), Sept. 14, 1999.

“Labor Day: ‘Overworked America?’“, Sept. 7, 1999.

“Big numbers” (Kroger worker $55 million award not blocked by workers’ comp), April 16, 2001; “Block PATH to lawsuits” (claims against NY-NJ commuter line under Federal Employer’s Liability Act), Sept. 1, 1999.

“Ohio high court says forget tort reform; should unionists be cheering?” (unions exempted from exposure to many injury suits), August 17, 1999.

“You made me defame myself” (workplace defamation law doctrine of “self-compelled publication”), August 10, 1999.

“All have lost, and all must have damages” (suit against employer by insurance agent who sold allegedly deceptive policies), August 3, 1999.

Multiple complaints and filing mills, 2003: “Disabled-access suit could stop Super Bowl“, Jan. 7-8.  2002: “‘Disability rights attorney accused of having inaccessible office’” (the one who sued Eastwood), Apr. 25; “Florida’s ADA filing mills grind away“, Mar. 29-31.  2001: “ADA’s busiest complaint-filer“, July 20-22.  2000: “Eastwood trial begins“, Sept. 21 (& Oct. 2: jury declines to award damages); “On the Hill: Clint Eastwood vs. ADA filing mills“, May 18-21; “Mass ADA complaints“, Mar. 7; “Bill introduced to curb opportunistic ADA filings“, Feb. 15 (& Sept. 5, 2001: Sen. Inouye co-sponsors); “Florida ADA complaint binge“, Jan. 26-27. 

“Maybe crime pays dept.” (hemorrhoids not a protected disability), Apr. 1, 2003.

Sports, 2003: “Disabled-access suit could stop Super Bowl“, Jan. 7-8.  2001: “By reader acclaim: football’s substance-abuse policy challenged“, Nov. 19-20; “‘A disabling verdict for organized sports’“, June 1-3 (Casey Martin case; & see June 22-24, May 30, 2001; Sept. 29-Oct. 1, April 10, 2000). 2000: “‘NCAA Can Be Sued Under ADA, Federal District Judge Rules’“, Nov. 28; “Wheelchair marathon suit“, Oct. 23.  1999: “Update: ADA youth soccer case“, Nov. 13-14; “After Casey Martin, the deluge“, Nov. 5-7; “ADA protection for boozing student athletes“, Sept. 29. 

“‘Court waives deadline as ‘reasonable accommodation’ for disabled litigator’“, Dec. 24-26, 2002.

Website accessibility: “‘Judge: Disabilities act doesn’t cover Web“, Oct. 22, 2002; “Website accessibility law hits the U.K.” (Scotland), May 7, 2001; “Olympics website’s accessibility complaint“, Aug. 16-17, 2000; “Disabled accessibility for campaign websites: the gotcha game“, July 19-20; “Welcome readers” (Intellectual Capital), June 19; “ADA & the web: sounding the alarm“, May 24; “Access excess“, May 2; “ADA & freedom of expression on the Web“, Feb. 10-11; editor’s testimony before House Judiciary Committee, Feb. 9, 2000; “Accessible websites no snap“, Dec. 21, 1999; “AOL sued for failure to accommodate blind users“, Nov. 5, 1999. 

“A belt too far“, Oct. 29, 2001; “‘Sorry, Slimbo, you’re in my seats’“, June 7, 2001 (& updates Dec. 15-16, 2001, Oct. 25-27, 2002); “Obese fliers“, Dec. 20, 2000. 

Safety, 2002: “Australia: ‘Blind, disabled should be able to fly’“, Sept. 30; “‘St- st - st- st- stop’“, Apr. 22; “Right to yell ‘fire’“, Apr. 5-7; “Entitled to jobs that kill?” (Echabazal v. Chevron), March 1-3 (&  Jun. 19-20, 2002, Apr. 22, 2002, Nov. 5, 2001). 2001: “EEOC approves evacuation questions for disabled“, Nov. 16-18; “A belt too far“, Oct. 29; “‘Colorblind Traffic-Light Installer Gets Fired, Sues County’“, June 28.  2000: “Coffee-spill suits meet ADA“, Aug. 10; “Prospect of injury no reason not to hire“, Jul. 5; “Disabled vs. disabled” (strobe alarms pit deaf against epileptic), May 17; “Ability to remain conscious not obligatory for train dispatcher, EEOC says“, March 21; “Warn and be sued“, Jan. 12. 1999: “Indications of turbulence” (pilot’s mental state), Dec. 1; “Death by mainstreaming” (retarded boy’s fatal fall from amusement park ride), Aug. 31 (& Oct. 29, 2001); & see “Kingdom of the One-Eyed,” Reason, Jul. 1998. 

“Right to break workplace rules and then return“, Sept. 16-17, 2002; “Soap star: ABC wrote my character out of the show” (”medical leave” for drug rehab), Apr. 10; “Parole board’s consideration of drug history could violate ADA“, Mar. 11, 2002; “ADA requires renting to addiction facility“, Dec. 21, 2000. 

Structures: “‘ADA Goes to the Movies’“, Jan. 30, 2003; “‘Disabled entitled to same sight lines in theaters’“, Sept. 5, 2002; “There’ll always be a California” (Santa Monica accessibility law for private homes), Dec. 4, 2001 (& similar ordinances in Ill. and Ariz.: Feb. 6-7, Mar. 6, 2002)(& letter to the editor, Apr. 11); “Crowded drugstores illegal?“, Jun. 29-Jul. 1, 2001 (& letter to the editor, July 6); “Do as we say, cont’d” (Mass.), Mar. 20, 2000; “‘Dune’ as we say” (ADA on Nantucket), Jul. 17-18, 1999.

Testing under siege, 2002: “Hence, loath?asterisk“, Jul. 22-23. 2001: “Update“, Aug. 20-21 (bar exam) (& letters, Oct. 22); “Litigators vs. standardized tests, I: the right to conceal“, Feb. 9-11.  2000: “Court okays suit against ‘flagging’ of test conditions“, May 10; “Disabled test-accommodation roundup“, Feb. 16; “Disabled accommodation in testing“, Jan. 12; “Lawsuits over failing grades” (”exam phobia” claim), Jan. 4. 1999:“Disabled accommodation vs. testing fairness“, Sept. 21, 1999; and see special education. 

“Disabled lap dancing just the start“, Jul. 19-21, 2002; “By reader acclaim: quadriplegic sues strip club over wheelchair access“, Jul. 16-17, 2002; “Blind customers want to touch club lapdancers“, Sept. 27-28, 2000. 

“Paper currency should accommodate blind, suit argues“, Jul. 15, 2002.

“Supreme Court clarifies ADA“, Jun. 19-20, 2002.

Media, performance accessibility, 2002: “11th Circuit reinstates ‘Millionaire’ lawsuit” (suit against “Millionaire” TV show over telephone-based screening), Jun. 21-23 (& Mar. 24-26, June 12, June 19, Nov. 7, 2000; Nov. 5, 2001).  2001: “‘Panel backs deaf patron’s claim against club’” (interpreter demand at comedy club), Mar. 9-11. 2000: “Seats in all parts” (theaters), Dec. 29, 2000-Jan. 2, 2001; “Movie caption trial begins” (assistive devices aid concert bootleggers), Aug. 1; “Complaint: recreated slave ship not handicap accessible“, Jul. 21-23; “Preferred seating” (theaters), Apr. 25-26; “Newest disabled right: audio TV captioning“, Mar. 22; “‘Deaf group files suit against movie theaters’” (closed captioning demand), Feb. 19-21; “The fine print” (sue Boston Globe for reducing type size?), Feb. 17; and see website accessibility. 

“Flowers, perfume in airline cabins not OK?” (Canada), May 17-19, 2002.

“Right to yell ‘fire’“, Apr. 5-7, 2002; “Compulsive grooming as protected disability“, March 16-18, 2001; “More Tourette’s discrimination suits“, March 12, 2001; “A thin-wall problem” (condo owner with Tourette’s vs. association), Aug. 21-22, 2000; “Update: Tourette’s bagger case“, Jul. 26-27, 2000; “Customer offense” (supermarket bagger with Tourette’s), Jun. 9-11, 2000.

“‘O’Connor Criticizes Disabilities Law As Too Vague’“, Mar. 22-24, 2002.

“Inability to get along with co-workers“, Mar. 8-10, 2002. 

“Minimum GPA for study abroad said unfair to disabled“, Jan. 9-10, 2002.

“Mass., Ill., NYC tobacco fees” (law firm sued by attorney with cancer), Jan. 2-3, 2002.

“Segway, the super-wheelchair and the FDA“, Dec. 12, 2001.

Special ed: see schools page.

U.K.: “European workplace notes” (harassment of dyslexic), Feb. 25-26, 2002; “Website accessibility law hits the U.K.” (Scotland), May 7, 2001; “Britain’s delicate soldiery” (UK military pressed to put disabled recruits on front lines), Dec. 22-25, 2000 (& Sept. 29-Oct. 1); “European roundup” (British hiring of disabled police), Oct. 16-17; “Blind customers want to touch club lapdancers“, Sept. 27-28; From the U.K.: watch your language” (job bureau restricts use of words like “hardworking”, “enthusiastic”), June 13, 2000. 

“Meet the ‘wrongful-birth’ bar“, Aug. 22-23, 2001 (more on wrongful birth/life: Dec. 11, 2001; Nov. 22-23, Sept. 8-10; June 8, May 9, Jan. 8-9, 2000).

“‘Businesses bracing for flood of lawsuits after state court ruling’” (Calif. law may apply retroactively), Aug. 1, 2001. 

“N.J. court declares transsexuals protected class“, July 30, 2001. 

“Six-hour police standoff no grounds for loss of job, says employee“, May 21, 2001; “‘Killer’s suit alleges job discrimination’“, Jan. 15, 2001; “‘Belligerent’ Worker Is Covered by ADA, Says Federal Court“, Dec. 18-19, 2000; “Accommodating theft” (N.J. lawyer discipline), Nov. 11, 1999; “‘Judge who slept on job faces new allegations’“, Oct. 4, 1999. 

“‘2000’s Ten Wackiest Employment Lawsuits’” (reverse-bias claim by worker with no mental disability), April 13-15, 2001. 

“Put out that match” (ADA invoked against agricultural burning), Feb. 28-March 1, 2001. 

“Anorexia as disability“, Jan. 26-28, 2001. 

“Sidewalk toilets nixed again” (Boston), Oct. 5, 2000. 

“Disabled rights roundup” (sign interpreters at doctor’s offices), Sept. 29-Oct. 1; 

“Welcome Toronto Star readers” (Ontario considers ADA-like law), Sept. 27-28, 2000.

“Movie caption trial begins” (Steve Chapman on ADA anniversary), Aug. 1, 2000; “‘How the ADA handicaps me’” (backfire effect in job interviews; ten year anniversary of ADA), Jul. 28-30; “ADA’s unintended consequences” (workplace losses for disabled), July 11, 2000. 

“Penalty for co.’s schedule inflexibility: 30 years’ front pay” (ADA case), June 16-18, 2000; “What ADA was written for“, March 15, 2000. 

“From our mail sack: ADA enforcement vignettes“, May 31, 2000.  See also letter to editor, December 1, 2000. 

“‘ADA’s good intentions have unintended consequences’” (John Elvin, Insight), March 3-5, 2000. 

“Latest excuse syndromes“, Jan. 13-14, 2000; “Down repressed-memory lane II: distracted when she signed“, Dec. 29-30, 1999; “Mow’ better ADA claims” (disability exemption from cutting one’s lawn?), July 26, 1999. 

“Blind newsdealer charged with selling cigarettes to underage buyer“, Sept. 16, 1999. 

“Weekend reading” (”disability studies” in academia), Aug. 21-22, 1999. 

“Be sensitive to Fluffy, or else” (obligation to accept emotional-support dog into store), July 9, 1999.

Articles by Overlawyered.com editor Walter Olson:

“Supreme Court Rescues ADA From Its Zealots,” Wall Street Journal, Jun. 18 (online subscribers only).

“Access Excess“, Reason, May 2000.

?Under the ADA, We May All Be Disabled?, ?Rule of Law?, Wall Street Journal, May 17, 1999. 

“Standard Accommodations” (rise of universal disability), Reason, Feb. 1999. 

“Kingdom of the One-Eyed,” Reason, July 1998. 

“Still Crazy” (Casey Martin case; ADA in the courts), Reason, May 1998. 

“Disabilities Law Protects Bad Doctors,” New York Times, November 28, 1997.

“Life, liberty, and the pursuit of a good beer,” excerpt from The Excuse Factory, Washington Monthly, September, 1997. 

“Time to Get Off the Tenure Track”, New York Times, July 8, 1997. 

“Disabling America“, National Review, May 5, 1997.

U.S. Department of Justice ADA home page
U.S. Access Board home page
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regulations (1630: ADA implementation; 1640: coordination of ADA with Section 504; 1641 government contractors). 
Text of ADA (Cornell LII) 

Online ADA Handbook
NBER: ADA employment effects study (Daron Acemoglu, Joshua Angrist) 
Boston Univ.: Pike Institute on Law & Disability
ABA Commission on Mental and Physical Disability Law

“Disability Debate” (Reason Online, “Breaking Issues”) 
“A good law gone bad” (Trevor Armbrister, Reader’s Digest) 
“Handicapping Freedom” (Ed Hudgins, Regulation mag/Cato Institute) 
“ADA: Time for Amendments” (Robert O’Quinn, Cato Institute, Aug. 9, 1991)

April 29-30 – “Gunning for manufacturers through courts”. “A NYC council member is seeking to limit access to guns in NYC even more by opening the door to lawsuits against gun manufacturers who don’t follow a ‘corporate code of conduct’. David Yassky, a former law professor and aide for Chuck Schumer when he was a congressman, received money from 189 attorneys and others of his ’social class’ in his successful campaign for Council, and filed an amicus brief in the US vs Emerson case encouraging a finding that in the 2nd Amendment, ‘bear arms’ meant for military use only.” (”Gunning for manufacturers through courts”, “Cut on the Bias” blog (Susanna Cornett), Apr. 22; “Metro Briefing: New York”, New York Times, Apr. 22).

On a happier note, the city of Boston last month dropped its extortionate lawsuit against the gun industry (David Abel, “Gun control forces say suits to go on”, Boston Globe, Mar. 29; “Mayor was right to drop gun case” (editorial), Boston Herald, Mar. 29 (”This case was frankly a publicity stunt — an expensive publicity stunt supposedly in the cause of ‘public health.’ But the roughly $500,000 it cost so far was diverted from other goals.”); “Boston Abandons Lawsuit Against Firearms Manufacturers”, National Shooting Sports Foundation press release, Mar. 28). (DURABLE LINK)

April 29-30 – “Erin Brockovich, the Brand”. “She gets confused with Heather Locklear and Suzanne Somers. … Over the course of last year, she became the most popular public-speaking client in the William Morris stable.” For newer readers, here’s our take. (Austin Bunn, New York Times Magazine, Apr. 28). (DURABLE LINK)

April 29-30 – Lawyers for chimps? “More and more legal reformers … are pressing to give chimpanzees legal standing — specifically, the ability to have suits filed in their names and to ask courts to protect their interests. … The advocates of granting legal standing to chimps have gained support from constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe, a Harvard Law School professor.” (David Bank, “A Harvard Professor Lobbies to Save U.S. Chimps From Monkey Business”, Wall Street Journal, Apr. 25 (online subscribers only); “Monkeying Around With the Constitution”, Ribstone Pippin blog, Apr. 25; InstaPundit, Apr. 25) (& see May 14-15). (DURABLE LINK)

April 29-30 – “Targeting “big food’”. The “campaign against Big Food is following the attack on Big Tobacco almost to a ‘T.’ … Any day now, I expect to hear that Big Food has secretly been adding special ingredients with known health risks — like salt — to their products for years to tempt the ignorant.” (Bruce Bartlett, “Targeting ‘big food’”, National Center for Policy Analysis opinion editorial, Apr. 3). It is already being argued that obesity, like smoking, imposes costs through health care provision on the non-obese, allegedly justifying more intensive government regulation of lifestyle choices (Pierre Lemieux, “It’s the Fat Police,” National Post (Canada), Apr. 6). And a 1998 revision by the federal government of its Body Mass Index standards more or less ensures that a large portion of the population will be considered to be suffering from a weight problem; according to the index, NCAA basketball stars Lonny Baxter of Maryland, Oklahoma’s Aaron McGhee, Kansas’s Nick Collision and Indiana’s Tom Coverdale are all considered “overweight” and in need of more exercise. (”Husky hoops stars?”, Center for Consumer Freedom, Mar. 27). (DURABLE LINK)

April 26-28 – “Positive Nicotine Test To Keep Student From Prom”. In Hartford City, Ind., Blackford High School has banned senior Rob Mahon, 18, from the senior prom after he tested positive for nicotine in a random drug test. Mahon, who is the editor of the school newspaper, “did not smoke on school property and is upset that he’s being punished for an activity that is legal for someone his age.” School officials, however, said that Mahon “knew the rules prohibiting drugs, alcohol and nicotine before he agreed to the testing that’s required for those in extracurricular activities.” The Indiana Civil Liberties Union is planning to represent him in a legal challenge. (TheIndyChannel.com, Apr. 25). Update May 10-12: school backs down. (DURABLE LINK)

April 26-28 – “Support case hinges on failed sterilization”. An attorney for plaintiff Heather Seslar is attempting to convince the Indiana Supreme Court that the doctor whose effort to sterilize Seslar fell short, with the result that she became pregnant and gave birth to a healthy baby girl, should pay for the entire cost of raising the child to adulthood. “A lower court already has sided with Seslar. Unless the Supreme Court overturns that decision, Indiana would become the fifth state to grant parents who underwent sterilization the right to sue doctors for the costs of raising an unexpected child. California, New Mexico, Oregon and Wisconsin also recognize the right.” (Vic Ryckaert, Indianapolis Star, Apr. 4). (DURABLE LINK)

April 26-28 – Columbia Law School survey on public attitude toward lawyers. A new nationwide survey commissioned by Columbia Law School asked a thousand respondents nationwide what they thought of the profession. It “contains some disheartening news for lawyers. … A full sixty percent of respondents said lawyers are overpaid, compared with a mere two percent who thought lawyers underpaid.” Thirty-nine percent considered lawyers either especially dishonest or somewhat dishonest, while 31 percent found them especially honest or somewhat honest, which left them faring better than politicians in the honesty ratings but sharply worse than police. Finally, respondents were asked: “Do you believe that lawyers do more harm than good by filing lawsuits that may raise the cost of doing business, or do they perform a beneficial role by holding big companies accountable to the law?” The wording of this question is decidedly peculiar — its first half, for example, states the case critical of trial lawyers about as ineptly as it is possible to do — and yet the side holding that lawyers “perform a beneficial role” prevailed by only a fifty to forty-one percent margin. (Michael C. Dorf, “Can the Legal Profession Improve Its Image?”, FindLaw, Apr. 17). (DURABLE LINK)

April 25 – “Disability rights attorney accused of having inaccessible office”. “The attorney who sued Clint Eastwood over disability accommodations at his hotel near Carmel was himself sued Tuesday on allegations his office bathroom was not wheelchair friendly. The federal suit was brought by George Louie, executive director of Oakland-based Americans with Disabilities Advocates. He alleges the bathroom and other amenities at attorney Paul Rein’s office in Oakland violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.” (AP/Contra Costa Times, Apr. 23)(see Oct. 2, 2000, Sept. 21, 2000 and links from there). Update: the allegations, which Rein vigorously contested, were later dropped without payment, according to court records (Joy Lanzendorfer, “Enforced Compliance”, MetroActive, Dec. 26, 2002). (DURABLE LINK)

April 25 – Mold sweepstakes: You May Already Be a Winner. “Entertainer Ed McMahon is suing his insurance company for more than $20 million, alleging that he was sickened by toxic mold that spread through his Beverly Hills house after contractors cleaning up water damage from a broken pipe botched the job.” (”Ed McMahon sues over mold, says dog died”, Los Angeles Times/ AZCentral.com, Apr. 9). Buyers of homeowners’ insurance may wind up among the losers: “State Farm, the largest insurer in California representing 22 percent of the market, decided last week that it would no longer write new homeowner policies in the state starting May 1. While that’s partly due to past losses, it’s also in large part due to the rising cost of mold-related claims. … In Texas, which has had the most claims increases [over mold] in the nation, rates have already nearly doubled for many homeowners.” (Deborah Lohse, “Mold becomes toxic issue to homeowners, insurers”, San Jose Mercury News, Apr. 23). Mold claims “could be the next asbestos. Yes, there’s a bit of difference: Asbestos fibers are known to cause disease and death. Whether household mold can do so is, to put it charitably, a matter of debate. But that hasn’t slowed the litigation over mold.” (Mary Ellen Egan, “The Fungus that Ate Sacramento,” Forbes, Jan. 21). Update May 21, 2003: McMahon’s claim said to have reaped $7 million settlement.

TEXAS MOLD LINKFEST: “Insurers estimate they paid out $670 million for mold-related property damage in Texas in 2001, more than double the total in 1999.” (Egan, Forbes, link above). See (all links 2001:) Jacob Sullum, “Fungi phobia”, TownHall.com, Aug. 21 (the wonderfully named Dripping Springs case); Bill Summers, “Mold cases could have a rotten effect”, San Antonio Express News, Oct. 18, reprinted at Texans for Lawsuit Reform; Eric Berger, “Mold Fears Overblown, Experts Say”, Houston Chronicle, July 12; CALA Houston links; Shannon Buggs, “Tackling Questions on Mold Coverage”, Houston Chronicle, Nov. 18; W. Gardner Selby, San Antonio Express News, “Coverage cut under review”, Nov. 13. (DURABLE LINK)

April 25 – Durbin’s electability. Illinois Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, a key Capitol Hill ally of the trial lawyers (he was the point man in defense of their unconscionable fees in the tobacco affair, for example), ran less well in his recent primary than incumbents usually do. Could he be headed for one-term status, like former Sen. Carol Moseley-Braun? (Steve Neal, “Durbin lacks the profile of a winner”, Chicago Sun-Times, Apr. 24)(see July 7, 2000). (DURABLE LINK)

April 23-24 – Fieger’s ivied walls. Controversial attorney Geoffrey Fieger is in the news again after losing a murder case for a client in Sarasota, Fla.: “Chief Circuit Judge Thomas Gallen said Fieger should be punished for calling two men who served on the jury ‘Nazis’ and ‘creeps.’ Fieger fired back, saying he has a First Amendment right to say bad things about jurors and that he may sue the judge for saying otherwise. Gallen said the Michigan lawyer’s ‘outrageous’ behavior violated a Florida Bar rule that says an attorney ’shall not make a statement that the lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the qualifications or integrity of’ court officials and jurors.” Fieger client Ralf Panitz, 42, “was convicted March 26 of killing his ex-wife, Nancy Campbell, on July 24, 2000, the same day he, Campbell and his new wife appeared on an episode of the ‘Jerry Springer Show.’” (Jennifer Sullivan, “Attorney, judge in war of words”, Manatee (Fla.) Herald-Tribune, Apr. 2).

Civility disputes involving Fieger are of course a staple item on this site. Last year, for example (see May 3, 2001), he faced a probe before the state attorney grievance commission following reports that he used his radio show to unleash “an obscenity-laced tirade” against three state appeals judges. For more examples of the Southfield, Mich.-based attorney’s style, see Sept. 14, 1999 and May 31, 2001. So it came as a bit of a shock to learn that the litigator’s name is now going to be adorning a prominent Michigan institution of legal education. According to Michigan State University’s law school, “Fieger has made a gift of $4 million to initiate and sustain the Geoffrey Fieger Trial Practice Institute,” billed as “the first trial practice institute at a law school designed specifically to train law students as successful trial lawyers.”

Rising to the dignity of the occasion in a press release, MSU-DCL dean and professor Terence Blackburn endorsed the school’s new benefactor in language well suited for a client recruitment brochure. “Mr. Fieger is arguably the most preeminent [sic] trial lawyer in the country, and he is an inspiration to our students,” Blackburn said. “It is Mr. Fieger’s dedication to his clients, his thorough preparation for each case and his skill in the courtroom that serve as a model for this institute.” (”Fieger’s $4 Million Gift To Law College at MSU Establishes Nation’s First Trial Practice Institute for Law Students”, MSU news release, Nov. 27; “$4 million gift to MSU-DCL funds trial practice institute”, MSU News, Dec. 6; “Fieger’s gift”, Lansing State Journal, Nov. 29 (defense of grant); letter from concerned alum, Detroit Free Press, Nov. 28). Last year the Detroit Free Press found Fieger unapologetic about charges by his opponents that he bullies and badgers witnesses on the stand. (Dawson Bell, “Fieger’s wins lose luster in appeals”, Detroit Free Press, May 29). “‘Trials are battles,’ Fieger said. Intimidating witnesses ‘is what trial attorneys do,’ he said.” Can we assume that it will therefore be a skill taught at the new institute? (DURABLE LINK)

April 23-24 – “Woman sues snack-food company for spoiling diet”. By reader acclaim: “A woman is suing a snack food company for $50 million saying its label on Pirate’s Booty corn and rice puffs foiled her diet. … Pirate’s Booty, manufactured by Robert’s American Gourmet Food, Inc., was recalled in January after the Good Housekeeping Institute found it contained 147 calories and 8.5 grams of fat, while its label said it contained only 120 calories and 2.5 grams of fat.” Now Meredith Berkman, 37, is suing claiming the mislabeling caused her to suffer “emotional distress” and “weight gain…mental anguish, outrage and indignation.” (AP/Salon, Apr. 13). Update: Feb. 9, 2006 (Berkman objects to settlement). (DURABLE LINK)

April 23-24 – Norway toy-ad crackdown. Yes, reports Bjorn Staerk on his blog (Mar. 25, Apr. 2), the Scandinavian country really does have an Ombudsman for Gender Equality whose apparent duties include monitoring sexism in toy ads, and yes, this ombudsman really is proposing to ban a particular toy ad which refers to boys as “tough”. (DURABLE LINK)

April 22 – Lawyers puree Big Apple. Figures from the City of New York’s fiscal year 2000 show that the city paid a record $459 million in judgments and settlements, a 10.5 percent increase over the previous fiscal year. $406 million of that figure was laid out on personal injury claims, up 11.5 percent from fiscal 1999. (Elaine Song, “Costs Climb for the City”, New York Law Journal, Mar. 21; “New York Sees Higher Verdicts in 2001″, New York Law Journal, Mar. 21; “Tort City, U.S.A.” (editorial), Wall Street Journal, Apr. 17 (online subscribers only). (DURABLE LINK)

April 22 – “How to Stuff a Wild Enron”. P.J. O’Rourke gives a flat tire to the pols and pundits who’ve tried to get anti-capitalist mileage out of the Enron scandal (The Atlantic, Apr.).

MORE ENRON LINKS: C. William (Bill) Thomas, “The Rise and Fall of the Enron Empire”, Texas Society of CPAs (via Political Hobbyist, who generously names us “one of the more famous blogs out there in the blogosphere“); Renee Deger, “Widening the Enron Net”, The Recorder, Apr. 9 (law firms, investment banks sued); Laura Goldberg, “Enron plaintiffs target bankers’ deep pockets”, Houston Chronicle, Apr. 5; Otis Bilodeau, “Gimme Shelter”, Legal Times, Apr. 16 (”In a worst-case scenario — where damages are so high that the firm itself goes bankrupt — partners in a general partnership could be forced to pay off the damage award over their entire careers.”); Renee Deger, “Leaning on the Lawyers”, The Recorder, Apr. 15; (prospects for Vinson & Elkins, Kirkland & Ellis); “Lerach’s Enron Sweep” (editorial), Wall Street Journal, Apr. 17 (online subscribers only); bloggers “Robert Musil” Apr. 14 and other dates, “Max Power” Apr. 10. (DURABLE LINK)

April 22 – “St- st- st- st- stop.” “A man with a stutter was turned down as a driving instructor by the British School of Motoring because he couldn’t say ’stop’ fast enough in an emergency”. Mr. Arsenal Whittick, 39, has filed a complaint with an employment tribunal charging disability discrimination. (”Stutterer turned down as driving instructor”, Evening Standard, Apr. 11)(via andrewsullivan.com, from which our headline is also swiped). And Dave Kopel, analyzing the pending Supreme Court case of Chevron v. Echabazal (can employers exclude physically vulnerable workers from jobs that might kill them? — see Mar. 1), includes a very kind reference to this site. (National Review Online, Mar. 27). (DURABLE LINK)

April 21 – Social notes from all over: New York Blog Bash. It isn’t easy to get our editor over to Avenue B, but he brings back a glowing report of the Friday night event hosted by the formidable duo of Orchid and Asparagirl and with econ-blog-diva Megan McArdle in attendance. Not only were those present uniformly agreeable to converse with, but their weblogs — see the RSVP list at Daily Dose for a not quite complete list — collectively make for an afternoon’s browse that’s about 8,500% percent more enjoyable and stimulating than is afforded by, say, the Sunday New York Times. Update: photos courtesy Asparagirl (our editor is the one with the beard and dark clothes). (DURABLE LINK)