- See you in court, ma: “Man awarded $115K after suing mom for lost pinky finger” [Obscure Store, Bergen County (N.J.) Record]
- Please reassure us Canada’s not going to follow U.S. down abusive road of asset seizure in law enforcement [Moin Yahya and Janet Neilson, Western Standard]
- What sorts of intellectual property norms prevail in the world of stand-up comedy? [ConcurOp]
- “Marc Dreier’s Son Sues College Roommate for $1M” [ABA Journal]
- Intersection of state divorce law with peripatetic military life can lead to harsh results [Bader, CEI]
- Grape-Nuts contain neither grapes nor nuts! Cap’n Crunch isn’t a real captain! It’s not fair! [comments on our popular "Crunchberries" item]
- “Lawyer’s ‘Contentious’ Claims Against Landlord Are Rejected” [NYLJ]
- “Adult” won’t cut it any more, we need a new legal category, more responsible, of “grownup” [Ken at Popehat]
Tagged as:
Canada,
divorce,
forfeiture,
Marc Dreier,
military
Continental Airlines says nine pilots got “paper” divorces from their spouses and then remarried after securing lump-sum distributions from the carrier’s retirement plan. Federal regulators have in the past indicated that plan administrators should disallow sham transactions intended to qualify for tax-favored retirement benefits. Two pilots have now countered with charges that the airline invaded their privacy when it investigated whether their divorces were really what they seemed. [Houston Chronicle and followup]
Tagged as:
airlines,
divorce,
taxes,
workplace
Noting that a litigant’s choice of counsel is to be given weight in such matters, a court in Stamford, Ct. has ruled against a husband’s request to disqualify the opposing attorney on the grounds that that attorney “simultaneously represents the defendant’s first and second wives”. ["Motion To Disqualify Lawyer Representing Both Wives Denied," Connecticut Law Tribune, May 11 (pay section of site)(Voruganti v. Voruganti, Malone, J.)]
Tagged as:
Connecticut,
divorce,
ethics
“A Quebec father who was taken to court by his 12-year-old daughter after he grounded her in June 2008 has lost his appeal.” [CBC] For some reason the litigation has not done wonders for family harmony:
The girl — who now lives with her mother — doesn’t have much of a relationship with her dad now, [attorney Kim] Beaudoin said.
“We went from a child who wanted to live with her father, and after all this has been done, they’re not speaking anymore.”
Tagged as:
Canada,
children's rights,
divorce
- Litigation over high-tech products is rife, but major benefits for consumers can be hard to discern [Low End Mac]
- “United settles with female ex-pilot who found p0rn in cockpits” [Obscure Store]
- California suit charges negligent “laying on of hands” at church service [Lowering the Bar]
- UN resolution against “defamation of religion” imperils free speech [Paula Schriefer, Freedom House/CSM, Steyn/NR "Corner", National Secular Society (U.K.), Ilya Somin @ Volokh
- DivorceNetwork.com, social networking for those caught up in family law battles? [Ambrogi, Legal BlogWatch]
- Prosecutors behaving badly in Wayne County (Mich.), Miami, Santa Clara County [Radley Balko, Reason "Hit and Run"]
- After nine years, the notorious Bill Lerach California-unfair-competition-law suit against Kwikset (over several screws from Taiwan in a lock marked “Made in America”) finally winds down [California Civil Justice, earlier]
- Oklahoma AG Drew Edmondson to poultry companies: my pals will bankrupt you with massive verdicts unless you settle [Rizo/Legal NewsLine; more]
Tagged as:
agriculture and farming,
attorneys general,
aviation,
Bill Lerach,
California,
churches,
divorce,
family law,
free speech,
hostile environment,
Oklahoma,
s. 17200,
social networking,
technology
- Probate court in Connecticut: bad enough when they hold you improperly in conservatorship, but worse when they bill you for the favor [Hartford Courant]
- Does “Patent Troll” in World of Warcraft count as a character type or a monster type? [Broken Toys]
- 102-year-old Italian woman wins decade-long legal dispute, but is told appeal could take 10 years more [Telegraph]
- “This Cartoon Could Be Illegal, If Two Iowa Legislators Have Their Way” [Eugene Volokh]
- David Giacalone, nonpareil commentator on attorneys’ fee ethics (and haiku), has decided to end his blog f/k/a. He signs off with a four-part series on lawyer billing and fairness to consumers/clients: parts one, two, three, four, plus a final “Understanding and Reducing Attorney Fees“. He’s keeping the site as archives, though, and let’s hope that as such it goes on shedding its light for as long as there are lawyers and vulnerable clients. More: Scott Greenfield.
- Even they can’t manage to comply? Politically active union SEIU faces unfair labor practice charges from its own employees [WaPo]
- Judge in Austin awards $3 million from couple’s estate to their divorce lawyers [Austin American-Statesman]
- “Keywords With Highest Cost Per Click”, lawyers and financial services dominate [SpyFu]
Tagged as:
attorneys' fees,
chasing clients,
Connecticut,
divorce,
do as we say,
ethics,
free speech,
Iowa,
Italy,
on other blogs,
patent trolls,
Texas,
wills and trusts
The divorce between Dr. Richard Batista of Ronkonkoma, Long Island, New York, and his wife Dawn has taken an unfortunate turn with Dr. Batista’s demand that she return his left kidney, which he had donated to her in a transplant operation. (Or at least its fair market value) Experts predict that the court will be less than sympathetic to his request [SSFC; Sally Satel, Daily Beast] And in Nebraska, the essential level of trust and goodwill that one would hope to see in a divorce has been undercut by William Lewton’s discovery of a secret recording device concealed in his four year old daughter’s teddy bear [WSJ Law Blog]
Tagged as:
divorce,
Long Island,
Nebraska
by SSFC on December 21, 2008
The Iowa Supreme Court has held that a wife can suffer an invasion of privacy in her home, even from her husband, according to this Associated Press story. Inconsiderate husbands and wives in the Hawkeye State shouldn’t make too much of this holding, which can probably be limited to its bizarre facts. Upholding a trial court’s award of $22,500 in damages, Iowa’s high court held that Cathy Tigges had a cause of action for invasion of privacy against her husband, Jeffrey Tigges, who placed multiple hidden cameras in the couple’s bedroom. Necessarily, the Court held that Mrs. Tigges did have a reasonable expectation of privacy from her husband in her marital bedroom, particularly when she thought she was alone.
For the nosey among us, neither the story nor the Court’s opinion reveals Mr. Tigges’ reason for placing the cameras, but one assumes he feared he was being cuckolded. Whether that was true or not, the Tiggses, who appear to have been a pair of amateur spymasters (each secretly recorded the other’s telephone conversations as well), have also been granted what sounds like a long overdue divorce.
Despite their concerns about privacy, the Tiggeses have succeeded in making their unhappy marriage a worldwide public spectacle, which I am doing my part to promote. That’s the funny thing about defamation and privacy lawsuits; in a society that values open courts, one often broadcasts the injury to a far larger audience by taking it to litigation. Thanks to How Appealing for the pointer.
Tagged as:
divorce,
privacy
The plaintiff alleges she gave in to the defendant priest’s sexual advances after confessing her marital difficulties to him. She alleges the priest assured her the sex was “ordained by God” so she thereafter engaged in intercourse with him. This, of course, is all due to the negligence of the local Catholic diocese according to her suit and not her own poor judgment in falling for such a lame pickup line. (“Confession Obsession?”, The Smoking Gun, Oct. 29).
Tagged as:
churches,
divorce,
personal responsibility
One Westport split cost the divorcing couple an estimated $13 million. It differed in degree, but not really in kind, from many lesser domestic catastrophes: “Divorcing couples in Connecticut regularly rack up bank-busting legal bills that can put the lesser earning party — and there often is an economic imbalance between warring couples — into bankruptcy. … the most expensive and sought-after divorce attorneys are commonly referred to as ‘junkyard dogs.’” Then there are the hefty sums you may be forced to hand over to lawyers who get themselves appointed guardians ad litem, to represent your kids against, well, you and your ex (Daniel D’Ambrosio, Hartford Advocate, Jul. 24).
Tagged as:
children's rights,
Connecticut,
divorce,
family law
- Nothing new about lawyers stealing money from estates, but embarrassing when they used to head the bar association [Eagle-Tribune; Lawrence, Mass., Arthur Khoury]
- Unusual “reverse quota” case: black job applicant wins $30K after showing beauty supply company turned her down because it had a quota of whites to hire [SE Texas Record]
- Who knew? Per class action allegations, pet food contains ingredients “unfit for human consumption” [Daily Business Review]
- U.K.: “A divorcee who won a £1.4million payout from her multi-millionaire husband is suing her lawyers because she claims she should have got twice that amount.” [Telegraph]
- UW freshman falls from fourth-floor dorm window after drinking at “Trashed Tuesday”, now wants $ from Delta Upsilon International as well as construction firm that put in windows [Seattle P-I, KOMO]
- After giant $103 million payday, current and former partners at Minneapolis law firm are torn by feuds and dissension — wasn’t there a John Steinbeck novella about that? [ABA Journal and again, Heins Mills]
- Small firm that used to make Wal-Mart in-house videos sets up shop at AAJ/ATLA convention hawking those videos for use in suits against the retailer [Arkansas Democrat Gazette, earlier]
- When the judge’s kid gets busted [Eric Berlin; Alabama]
Tagged as:
Alabama,
alcohol,
bar associations,
class actions,
colleges and universities,
divorce,
feeing frenzy,
for me but not for thee,
Massachusetts,
Minnesota,
personal responsibility,
sued if you do,
Wal-Mart,
Washington state,
wills and trusts
In 2001, a Florida court awarded Marlene Forand a $240,000 divorce settlement, plus $6,000 per month in permanent alimony and attorney’s fees, from ex-husband Bob in 2001, 6 years after their marriage ended. So why is she living with her mother and taking public support? The St. Petersburg Times reports that the lawyers who botched enforcement of the claim in Alabama, Bob’s new home state, somehow ended up with only a $162,000 judgment from her ex and took more than half that in legal fees, leaving Forand, after paying off some marriage debts, with nothing at all.
But wasn’t the ex supposed to pick up the bill?
No, her lawyers said. She signed contracts with them. She owed them. If she wanted Bob to pay her legal fees, she would have to sue him. Of course, that would mean more legal fees.
Marlene was famous for her fiery e-mails. She sent one to Haas:
“Why should I suffer and have to pay attorney’s fees to make him pay for what was already ordained in the Florida court? I’m still left holding the debt from the marriage judgments for 20 years and he walks free. This I will not tolerate. What’s the next move?”
In Alabama, there didn’t seem to be a next move, at least one she could afford.
Marlene e-mailed Haas: “That idiot you hired in Alabama got himself and you paid a substantial amount of money to leave me destitute.”
Haas e-mailed Marlene: “Frankly, both Paul [his man in Birmingham] and I are tired of your abuse.”
Forand kicked Haas off the case (for the second time) in 2006 and is now representing herself. “This is not the end,” she told the Times. “If I’ve learned anything about the law, I’ve learned you can always file another motion. You can always object.”
But after 13 years of litigation, the Florida judiciary has a less rosy view of Forand’s prospects. Responding to Forand’s motion to compel Bob to swear that he had no documentation of any of his assets, a Tampa judge despaired, “Even if I rule 100 percent in your favor, I’m just going to add another piece of paper [to your casefile] — the next page of Volume 13.” (”A Divorce, Unsettled,” St. Petersburg Times, Jun. 22).
Tagged as:
Alabama,
divorce
The father wouldn’t let her go on a school trip because he said she’d been acting up, including using a friend’s account to post inappropriate pictures on a dating site. “But [Quebec Superior Court] Justice Suzanne Tessier, who was presiding over the case, found the punishment too severe.” The mother, who is divorced from the father, was supporting the girl; the school’s policy was that both parents’ permission was required for such trips. According to a lawyer involved in the case, the father has legal custody but the girl has been living with her mother for the past month. (AFP/FoxNews.com, Globe and Mail, Eugene Volokh). Plus: Token Conservative suggests a new writ of “habeas bratus”.
Tagged as:
Canada,
children's rights,
divorce
And so the divorce case winds up generating massive demands for hard drive contents and other electronic discovery. Draconian spoliation sanctions, as exemplified in the Morgan Stanley-Perelman and Zubulake-UBS Warburg cases, make a potentially fatal trap for the unwary:
Defense lawyers complain that their clients often are forced to supply voluminous information at great cost with little benefit. And because there is so much more information potentially subject to a discovery order, the chances are greater that a client might violate the order by inadvertently deleting data.
“Does this enhance justice? Not usually,” said Tess Blair, a partner at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius L.L.P., who heads the 1,350-lawyer firm’s electronic-data-discovery unit. “It becomes a weapon in many cases.”
(Chris Mondics, “Ediscovery profoundly changing lawyering”, Philadelphia Inquirer, Jun. 8).
Tagged as:
discovery,
divorce,
Google,
hard drive,
sanctions,
spoliation
We’ve had a lot of Montgomery Blair Sibley coverage over the years:
And we didn’t even mention his work representing Larry Sinclair (the fellow who unsuccessfully sued Barack Obama for denying Sinclair’s implausible claim that he had engaged in a homosexual tryst with him) in a lawsuit against three anonymous bloggers. (DBKP blog, Mar. 14.)
After years of over-the-top abusive litigation, the state bar finally took action, and he has been suspended by the Florida bar for three years. No doubt, this will result in a new round of frivolous pro se collateral litigation. It took a contempt-of-court citation for failure to pay child support before the Florida bar took action, so this can hardly be considered a rousing success of the bar in policing its own, even for someone as over-the-top as Sibley. (Florida Bar v. Sibley; ABA Journal, Apr. 25; MPGS blog, May 14; h/t S.G.).
Update: Two commenters (who never appeared on Overlawyered before) implausibly defend Sibley, both posting from BellSouth accounts in Atlanta, GA. Nothing about a divorce requires one to sue seven Supreme Court justices for “judicial treason” for denying a (frivolous) certiorari petition from a frivolous lawsuit. He should have been disbarred a long time ago; that he is only being suspended, and then only because of failure to obey court orders, is appalling. He’s been a hazard to his clients and to taxpayers; so, no, I don’t think he’s a “damn good lawyer.”
Update, May 16, 2:45 AM: We originally repeated a second-hand report sent to us that Sibley had also been suspended in DC as part of reciprocal discipline. It is possible that our correspondent confused a Rule 8.1 report, made by the DC Bar counsel recommending reciprocal suspension, with an actual suspension. If a Rule 8.1 report was filed, Sibley is entitled to file a response; no oral argument is scheduled at this time (though none is required to be scheduled) and no DC Board on Professional Responsibility report is listed as having issued with respect to Sibley. Rule 8.4 of the DC Board on Professional Responsibility Rules of Procedure is titled “Conclusive Effect of Adjudication in Other Jurisdiction,” which would appear to give Sibley nothing to argue in DC, and would likely make discipline inevitable, but the District of Columbia, in its typical competence, has posted the wrong text for 8.4 on its website, so I cannot say that for certain. Montgomery Sibley is, as of May 16, still listed on the DC Bar’s website as a member in good standing. If the error is ours, rather than that of the DC Bar website, we regret the error. Without written confirmation of the suspension, we retract the original statement that the DC Bar has suspended Sibley in response to the Florida bar’s three-year suspension of Sibley.
Update, May 20: We were right the first time.
Tagged as:
Atlanta,
Barack Obama,
divorce,
ethics,
Larry Sinclair,
legal discipline,
Montgomery Blair Sibley,
Palfrey,
pro se
