- Judge rules Segways not necessary to accommodation at Disney World, throws out settlement negotiated by disabled rights group [Bloomberg, WSJ Law Blog; background here and here] More: OnPoint News (disputing claims of Disney victory).
- “Too Many Lawyers or Too Many Laws?” [Somin, Volokh, on Scalia; earlier]
- More on the $500K award to woman who escaped first WTC bombing and broke ankle ten days later [John Hochfelder in comments]
- $3 million race bias suit against Martha Stewart Living magazine seems to have followed protest over home furnishing item often described as “coolie-hat” lampshade [NY Post]
- Skyboxes for the mayor and city councilors who approved the stadium — and this is ethically OK? [Coyote]
- Getting kind of meta: “Lawyer Says Lawyer Defamed Him in Press Release About Defamation Suit” [NLJ]
- “Free credit score” firm backs off legal effort to identify critical blogger — but who’s this they’ve identified as their foe? [Paul Levy, Consumer Law & Policy, Felix Salmon, earlier]
- EEOC says Catholic college “discriminated against women by removing coverage for prescription contraceptives from [its] health insurance plan” [Gaston, N.C. Gazette via LaborProf]
Tagged as:
bloggers and the law,
Catholic Church,
disabled rights,
Disney,
EEOC,
libel slander and defamation
After 18 years of litigation, a judge has dismissed all remaining infringement claims by “Winnie the Pooh” heirs against Disney [American Lawyer; earlier here, here, etc.]
Tagged as:
copyright,
Disney
- Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Tex.) doesn’t think Rep. Waxman’s pretend hearing Sept. 10 was enough, and writes a letter to Reps. Waxman and Rush (PDF courtesy Motorcycle Industry Council) explaining why a real hearing is needed (including as an addendum my WSJ piece from last Monday).
- Speaking of CPSIA author Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.), he’s praised the new rhinestone ban [Woldenberg]
- At the Wall Street Journal, a letter to the editor regarding my op-ed of last week generally agrees with its thrust but claims that I “[err] when assigning blame to consumer groups” among others for the enactment. I find this charge baffling, since groups like Public Citizen, PIRG and the Consumer Federation of America 1) were routinely cited in the press during the bill’s run-up to enactment as key advocates of its more extreme provisions, 2) have loudly claimed credit for enacting those provisions and the overall bill ever since, 3) have been routinely cited this year in the press as key opponents of any effort to revisit the law in Congress. Why strive to excuse them from a responsibility that they gladly shoulder? Carter Wood at ShopFloor also notes that labor unions unwisely cheered on their purported consumer-group allies, a stance one hopes they are rethinking in light of the statute’s actual effects on American employers and jobs.
- BoardGameGeek had a discussion of the law again this summer, mostly focusing on the tracking label rules and the burden they pose to makers of new games, but also noting the thrift/reseller effects (earlier). Meanwhile, Handmade Toy Alliance activist Dan Marshall notes on Twitter, “Just spoke with guy who invented a board game about dinosaurs. He’s paying $2400 to get it tested 4 #CPSIA and is mad as hell about Mattel.”
- So let’s all panic now: NPR reports minute amounts of lead alloy in a Disney-branded zipper.
- Before CPSIA came along, Illinois lawmakers enacted their own lead law which, stunt-like, sets an even lower permissible lead level often flunked by common substances such as ordinary garden dirt, according to Rick Woldenberg (earlier on dirt, and related on rocks). More: Wacky Hermit.
PUBLIC DOMAIN IMAGES from Ethel Everett, illustrator, Nursery Rhymes (1900), courtesy ChildrensLibrary.org.
Tagged as:
CPSIA,
CPSIA and Congress,
Disney,
PIRG,
Public Citizen
Disney, Universal and Busch Entertainment weren’t eager to discuss the details of their legal defense but that didn’t stop the Orlando Sentinel from developing a searchable database of 477 state and federal cases filed against the three companies over the years 2004-08. Most cases were slip-falls, very few went to trial as opposed to settling, and in general the companies seemed to enjoy a fair bit of success both at satisfying patrons before their discontents reached the stage of lawsuits and at defending against the suits if brought.
It seems the companies are also willing to utilize provisions of Florida law that go further in the direction of “loser-pays” than do the laws of many other states:
Plaintiffs who lose sometimes end up footing the theme parks’ legal bills. The theme-park companies can, and do, go after unsuccessful plaintiffs, seeking reimbursement for their legal expenses. Under Florida law, anyone who sues anyone else over a personal injury faces this possibility. If the defendant offers a settlement but the plaintiff rejects it and then loses the case (or, in some circumstances, even if the plaintiff wins the case), the defendant can demand the plaintiff pay the defendant’s legal bills.
Reports of other successful defendants pressing their rights under such provisions in Florida or elsewhere are not exactly common, leaving the question of whether 1) the theme parks are making more aggressive use of the Florida rules than other defendants, 2) plaintiffs who go to trial against theme parks are atypical in some way, or 3) other defendants use the fee-shift provisions too, but we just don’t hear about it much.
Tagged as:
amusement parks,
Disney,
Florida,
loser pays,
slip and fall
- Golfer’s ball bounces off yardage marker and hits him in eye, and he sues; not the Florida case we blogged last month, this one took place in New Hampshire [Manchester Union-Leader]
- Who needs democracy, much easier just to let the Litigation Lobby run things: elected Illinois lawmakers keep enacting limits on med-mal awards, but trial-lawyer-friendly Illinois Supreme Court keeps striking them down, third round pending at the moment [Peoria Journal-Star, Alton Telegraph, Illinois Times, Reality Medicine (ISMS)]
- “A sword-wielding, parent-killing psychopath can be such a help around the house.” [we have funny commenters]
- Brooklyn lawyer Steven Rondos, charged with particularly horrendous looting of incapacitated clients’ estates [earlier], said to have served the New York State Bar Association “as vice president of its guardianship committee” [NYPost]
- Updated annals of public employee tenure: Connecticut state lawyer who assumed bogus identity to write letter that got her boss fired drew a $1000 fine as well as a reprimand — and then got a raise [Jon Lender/Hartford Courant and more, earlier here and here]
- Judge Bobby DeLaughter indicted and arraigned as new chapter of Dickie Scruggs judicial-corruption story gets under way in Mississippi; Tim Balducci and Steve Patterson, central figures in Scruggs I, each draw 2-year sentences [NMC/Folo and more, more, YallPolitics, more, earlier on Balducci, DeLaughter]
- Disney “Tower of Terror” ride not therapeutic for all patrons: British woman sues saying she suffered heart attack and stroke after riding it several times [AP]
- Convicted of torching his farm, Manitoba man sues his insurance company for not making good on policy [five years ago on Overlawyered]
Tagged as:
bar associations,
Bobby DeLaughter,
Dickie Scruggs,
Disney,
golf,
Illinois,
New Hampshire,
New York state,
public employment,
wills and trusts
“A Florida woman who claims the G-forces from a theme park ride relieve her chronic pain has sued Walt Disney World for breaching its contract with visitors by limiting her to four rides per visit on its Tower of Terror. … In a complaint filed last month in Osceola County, Fla., Denise Mooty alleges she needs the Tower of Terror for therapy rather than thrills.” Disney denies the charges and says Mooty was made to leave the park “for causing a disturbance within the presence of other guests and using foul language toward a Cast Member.” [Heller, OnPoint News]
Tagged as:
amusement parks,
Disney
- Judge Posner’s patience snaps in a class action: the case “is an example of the typical pathology of class action litigation, which is riven with conflicts of interest… The lawyers for the class could not concede the utter worthlessness of their claim because they wanted an award of attorneys’ fees.” Complete with a quotation from Leo Rosten about chutzpah [Mirfasihi v. Fleet Mortgage Corporation; NMC @ Folo, Courthouse News and again]
- Erosion of mens rea prerequisite in criminal law should alarm all of us across left-right lines [Doug Berman on John Hasnas WLF paper]
- “Federal drain law forces pool closings” [Boston Globe]
- Gambling habit was no excuse for Woodbridge, Va. lawyer to forge clients’ signature on lawsuit settlements which he pocketed; Stephen Conrad drew a 11-year sentence after doing $4 million damage to clients. Also in Virginia, former Christiansburg attorney Gerard Marks pleaded guilty Nov. 13 to forgery [Va. Lawyers Weekly; earlier here, and, on Marks, first links here]
- Plaintiff family in Anaheim, Calif. police-shooting lawsuit have an unusual demand: that statue of deceased victim be put up on Disneyland’s Main Street [Orange County Register]
- Connecticut state lawyer who assumed bogus identity to send anonymous letter that got her boss fired, then claimed whistleblower protection, is let off with reprimand and nine hours of ethics training [Schwartz, earlier]
- “Patent troll sues Oprah, Sony over online book viewing” [The Register; Illinois Computer Research, Scott Harris, etc.]
- JetBlue incident at JFK: “240,000 dollars awarded to man forced to cover Arab T-shirt” [AFP/Yahoo, Raed Jarrar]
Tagged as:
class action settlements,
Disney,
JetBlue,
patent trolls,
Richard Posner,
Virginia
- Nastygrams fly at Christmas time over display and festival use of “Jingle Bells”, Grinch, etc. [Elefant]
- Claims that smoking ban led to instantaneous plunge in cardiac deaths in Scotland turns out to be as fishy as similar claims elsewhere [Siegel on tobacco via Sullum, Reason "Hit and Run"]
- Myths about the costs and consequences of an automaker Chapter 11 filing [Andrew Grossman, Heritage; Boudreaux, WSJ] Drowning in mandates and Congress throws them an anchor [Jenkins, WSJ]
- Mikal Watts may be the most generous of the trial lawyers bankrolling the Texas Democratic Party’s recent comeback [Texas Watchdog via Pero]
- Disney settles ADA suit demanding Segway access at Florida theme parks “by agreeing to provide disabled guests with at least 15 newly-designed four-wheeled vehicles.” [OnPoint News, earlier]
- Update on Scientology efforts to prevent resale of its “e-meter” devices on eBay [Coleman]
- Scary: business-bashing lawprof Frank Pasquale wants the federal government to regulate Google’s search algorithm [Concurring Opinions, SSRN]
- Kind of an endowment all by itself: “Princeton is providing $40 million to pay the legal fees of the Robertson family” (after charges of endowment misuse) [MindingTheCampus]
Tagged as:
colleges and universities,
disabled rights,
Disney,
eBay,
feeing frenzy,
Google,
Mikal Watts,
nastygrams,
Scientology,
smoking bans,
Texas
We missed this story in February, but a federal judge in Orlando threw out the suit (Nov. 13) claiming that Disney World discriminates against the disabled by not permitting Segway transportation devices. The judge didn’t reach the actual merits, but ruled that the plaintiffs hadn’t adequately established that they actually intended to visit the park. (UPI, Feb. 21).
Update to the update (5:30 p.m.): Matthew Heller of On Point News writes to say, “The Segway suit is actually alive and kicking. The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint and in May the judge denied a motion to dismiss, finding they had alleged ‘a specific intent to visit the Parks in the future.’”
Tagged as:
disabled rights,
Disney
- To hold a party in the public parks of Bergenfield, N.J., you’ll need homeowner’s or renter’s insurance to throw on the line [Bergen Record]
- More on suits against Victoria’s Secret over allegedly hazardous bras, thongs, and undergarments, including an aspiring class action over contact rashes [Heller/On Point News]
- Supreme Court will review Navy sonar controversy, which we’ve long covered in this space [Adler @ Volokh]
- Hope of legalized online gambling fades, and you can blame Republicans on Capitol Hill for that [Stuttaford, NRO "Corner"]
- Disney said to be behind bad proposal to soak foreign tourists to fund visit-America promotions [Crooked Timber]
- “Squishier than most”: Nocera on A.M.D.’s predatory-pricing antitrust suit against Intel [NYT]
- Process serving company lied about delivering SEC witness subpoena and falsified later document, judge rules, awarding victim $3 million [Boston Globe]
- Revisiting the false-accusation ordeal of Dr. Patrick Griffin, and how it relates to pressure to have needless chaperones at medical procedures [Buckeye Surgeon, Dorothy Rabinowitz Pulitzer piece]
- Overlawyered turns nine years old tomorrow (more). Commenters: how long have you been reading the site? Any of you go back to its first year?
Tagged as:
antitrust,
Disney,
gambling,
insurance,
Navy sonar,
New Jersey,
Victoria's Secret,
wrong right
- More on that New Mexico claim of “electro-sensitive” Wi-Fi allergy: quoted complainant is a longtime activist who’s written an anti-microwave book [VNUNet, USA Today "On Deadline" via ABA Journal]
- Your wisecracks belong to us: “Giant Wall of Legal Disclaimers” at Monsters Inc. Laugh Floor at Disneyland [Lileks; h/t Carter Wood]
- New at Point of Law: AAJ commissions a poll on arbitration and gets the results it wants; carbon nanotubes, tomorrow’s asbestos? California will require lawyers operating without professional liability insurance to inform clients of that fact (earlier here and here); and much more.
- Actuaries being sued for underestimating funding woes of public pension plans [NY Times via ABA Journal]
- City of Santa Monica and other defendants will pay $21 million to wrap up lawsuits from elderly driver’s 2003 rampage through downtown farmers’ market [L.A. Times; earlier]
- Sequel to Giants Stadium/Aramark dramshop case, which won a gigantic award later set aside, is fee claim by fired lawyer for plaintiff [NJLJ; Rosemarie Arnold site]
- Privacy law with an asterisk: federal law curbing access to drivers license databases has exemption that lets lawyers purchase personal data to help in litigation [Daily Business Review]
- Terror of FEMA: formaldehyde in Katrina trailers looks to emerge as mass toxic injury claim, and maybe we’ll find out fifteen years hence whether there was anything to it [AP/NOCB]
- Suit by “ABC” firm alleges that Yellow Book let other advertisers improperly sneak in with earlier alphabetical entries [Madison County Record]
- Gun law compliance, something for the little people? A tale from Chicago’s Board of Aldermen [Sun-Times, Ald. Richard Mell]
- Think twice about commissioning a mural for your building since federal law may restrain you from reclaiming the wall at a later date [four years ago on Overlawyered]
Tagged as:
AAJ,
amusement parks,
Aramark,
arbitration,
autos,
Chicago,
copyright,
deep pocket,
disabled rights,
Disney,
dramshop statutes,
environment,
for me but not for thee,
guns,
Katrina,
lawyering vs. privacy,
Los Angeles,
Louisiana,
Madison County,
Mississippi,
New Mexico,
roads and streets,
taxpayers
“Three disabled people have sued Walt Disney World for not allowing them to use their Segways to move around its theme parks. … Disney says it fears Segways could endanger other guests because they can go faster than 12 mph.” (AP/Centre Daily Times (Pa.), Nov. 11). More: Washington Post, MagicalMountain.net. in Orlando Sentinel columnist Mike Thomas (”Note to Disney: Don’t give up on Segway suit”, Nov. 13) writes:
If a disabled person can get around just as well in a wheelchair as on a Segway, does Disney have the right to pick the wheelchair in the interest of guest safety?
One of the people suing Disney says she did not want her children seeing her rely on a wheelchair.
But to go that route means we expand the ADA to accommodate not only people’s disabilities but also their feelings about their disabilities.
I feel for that woman, but this is a huge legal leap.
Tagged as:
disabled rights,
Disney
The recent decision by News Corp. publishing subsidiary HarperCollins to cancel the publication of O.J. Simpson’s no-tell tell-all If I Did It is generating ripple upon ripple of actual and threatened litigation. Last Friday, Dec. 15, News Corp. summarily fired Judith Regan, who made the Simpson deal and who would have published the book under her Regan Books imprint. Notwithstanding her personal responsibility for one of the great debacles of contemporary media, Regan maintains she is the wronged party in the firing and has hired high-profile Hollywood lawyer Bert Fields to take on her former employers.
The Wall Street Journal (Dec. 18 – article is available to non-subscribers) reported yesterday:
But Ms. Regan is fighting back, hiring well-known Hollywood litigator Bert Fields. ‘They’ve chosen war and they will get exactly that,’ said Mr. Fields in an interview. ‘She won’t take this lying down.’
Mr. Fields said HarperCollins had used guards to lock down Ms. Regan’s office and had also impounded her personal belongings. ‘We’ll take appropriate action for everything HarperCollins has done,’ added Mr. Fields. ‘They chose this path and I hope they remember it.’ A HarperCollins spokesman said that Ms. Regan collected her personal belongings before leaving her office in Los Angeles and that her office in New York wasn’t locked and that her belongings weren’t impounded.
* * *
[T]his past week, tensions flared, although details are still sketchy. One scenario has it that Ms. Regan made some intemperate remarks to a HarperCollins attorney on Friday afternoon, causing Ms. Friedman to fire her. The termination was executed with none of the usual corporate pleasantries about "pursuing other opportunities" and long years of service.
In an intriguing sidelight, the WSJ’s Law Blog (Dec. 18) reports that attorney Fields is, or fancies himself, a Shakespeare scholar and has had two books published on Shakespearean subjects . . . through the Regan Books imprint. (Oh no, no potential conflicts of interest there; let’s just move along.)
Fields is perhaps best known as the bane of the Walt Disney Company: he represented Jeffrey Katzenberg in the now-settled litigation arising from Katzenberg’s departure from the company, he was consulted by the Weinstein brothers of Miramax when their relationship with Disney cooled, and he has featured prominently in the seemingly never-ending dispute over the rights to Winnie the Pooh. He has also been a subject of interest, but has not been the object of any criminal charges, in the investigations surrounding wiretapping and other alleged misdeeds by "private investigator to the stars" Anthony Pellicano.
News Corp., in preparing to respond to Regan’s and Fields’ accusations, has taken the unusual step of disclosing the content of otherwise confidential notes taken by one of its own attorneys. Those notes purport to reveal anti-Semitic remarks made by Regan and claimed by News Corp. to have been the "last straw" leading to Regan’s firing. (See New York Times, Dec. 19).
Meanwhile, ABC News (Dec. 18, via the publishing weblog GalleyCat) reports that Regan and others at Regan Books, HarperCollins and News Corp. will likely either be named as defendants or at the very least have their depositions taken on behalf of the heirs of Ronald Goldman, who continue to attempt to collect on their civil wrongful death judgment against Simpson. The Goldman family sees the entire transaction as a further attempt to hide Simpson’s assets:
The lawsuit would likely be based on the legal premise of ‘fraudulent transfer,’ which in this case would contend that News Corp. executives knowingly conspired to assist Simpson in subverting a civil judgment against him.
And so the saga continues, with only the lawyers — and Simpson — seeming to gain from it.
~~~
UPDATE: The Smoking Gun (Dec. 19) has posted a copy of the Goldman lawsuit, to be filed in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles and naming as defendants Simpson and Lorraine Brooke Associates, a corporation created (per the Complaint) to “warehouse Simpson’s intellectual property rights” and to serve as a conduit through which proceeds of those rights might be funneled to evade the Goldman judgment.
Tagged as:
Anthony Pellicano,
Disney,
movies film and videos,
publishers
Writes Prof. Childs (Jun. 15) of the lawsuit over the death of a four-year-old hours after taking part in the Mission:Space ride:
Setting aside the allegation of a failure to respond properly (about which I know nothing), the lawsuit presents a fairly fundamental question in amusement litigation: when a ride does exactly what it is supposed to do, and when that action is well-disclosed to riders and is safe for the vast majority of people, who, if anyone, is responsible when that action causes foreseeable injuries to people with unknown preexisting conditions?…
As for a warnings claim, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a ride with such thorough signage.
Tagged as:
Disney,
sports
Writers Ronnie Niederman and Judith Shangold sued Disney, claiming that in publishing “Summerland,” a novel by author Michael Chabon with a baseball theme, the entertainment giant’s Miramax Books subsidiary had ripped off one of their own 1995 idea submissions to Disney. Trouble is, the theatrical plot they claimed to have submitted in 1995 contained numerous references to the Palm Pilot personal organizer, a product not introduced until 1997. Citing “voluminous, independent and irrefutable evidence” that the plaintiffs did not create the treatment at the time they said they did, federal judge William H. Pauley concluded “that there was ‘clear and convincing’ evidence that the plaintiffs had committed a fraud on the court and ‘manipulated the judicial process.’” He dismissed their case and ordered them to pay Disney’s legal fees in an amount to be determined later. (Mark Hamblett, “Judge Blasts Bogus Proof, Rejects Claim Against Disney”, New York Law Journal, Jan. 18). Jonathan Edelstein comments at Head Heeb (Jan. 21).
Tagged as:
Disney,
legal extortion,
loser pays,
publishers
Amusement park managements in California are unhappy about a new 4-3 decision by the state’s supreme court holding that operators of park rides constitute “common carriers” akin to bus and trolley lines for safety purposes, thus exposing them to a higher standard of care in injury lawsuits. Of particular concern: given that passengers on ordinary conveyances are supposed to be protected from dangers that would occasion acute personal fear and emotional distress, what are the implications for roller coasters and other thrill rides in which conveying sensations of that sort is the whole idea? Maybe the brass at Disney (which was the defendant in the suit at hand) weren’t being entirely overcautious when they slowed down the Mad Hatter’s spinning teacups (see Mar. 4 and Mar. 9, 2004). (Maura Dolan and Kimi Yoshino, “High Court Raises Bar for Safety of Thrill Rides”, Los Angeles Times, Jun. 17)(via Ken Masugi, Claremont).
Tagged as:
amusement parks,
California,
Disney,
emotional distress
Due in part to expansions of copyright law lobbied for by Disney and other giants, a huge volume of writing, art and music which would otherwise by now have entered the public domain is still under copyright, even though the rights to much of it — things like picture postcards, ephemeral commercial illustration and sheet music issued by long-defunct publishers or with no identifying marks at all — cannot be traced to any particular current successor-owner even by good faith efforts. Per Wired News:
According to comments submitted to the copyright office, one married couple couldn’t get a wedding photograph repaired: The photography shop would not scan and reprint the photo because it was taken by a professional and the shop was afraid of violating copyright, even though the photographer was out of business.
“For heaven’s sake, this is a photograph of me and my wife, and I can’t have it legally repaired!!! Wrong, wrong, wrong!” wrote William Haynes.
(Katie Dean, “Copyright Reform to Free Orphans?”, Apr. 12).
Tagged as:
art and artists,
copyright,
Disney,
music and musicians,
technology
“The Walt Disney Company prevailed on Monday in a 13-year legal dispute over royalties related to its Winnie the Pooh franchise when a judge dismissed the case, contending the plaintiff altered confidential memorandums and covered up the theft of documents obtained by a private investigator who sifted through the company’s trash. Judge Charles W. McCoy of Los Angeles Superior Court wrote in his decision that the misconduct of the Slesinger family, which sued Disney in 1991 after contending the company cheated it out of royalty fees, was ’so egregious that no remedy short of terminating sanctions’ would adequately protect Disney and the justice system from further abuse.” The family is vowing to appeal (Laura Holson, “After 13 Years, Judge Dismisses Case on Pooh Bear Royalties”, New York Times, Mar. 30). Earlier in the case, Disney had drawn sanctions “for deliberately destroying 40 boxes of documents that could have been relevant to the case, including a file marked ‘Winnie the Pooh-legal problems’”; see “The Document-Shredding Facility at Pooh Corner”, Aug. 24-26, 2001. For more on the propensity of some investigators retained in litigation to rifle adversaries’ garbage and commit other invasions of privacy, see Nov. 11, 2003 (FBI probe of Hollywood lawyers); Jul. 28-30, 2000 (Terry Lenzner, Oracle). More: Southern California Law Blog has followed the case.
Tagged as:
copyright,
Disney,
lawyering vs. privacy,
overzealous advocacy,
publishers,
spoliation
