- Police in city of Manchester, U.K. say they’ll record attacks on punks, Goths as hate crimes [AP]
- If claiming severe permanent injuries from auto mishap, best not to place well in a marathon six months later [West Virginia Record]
- “Altering or deleting a Facebook account during litigation may be … spoliation of evidence” [Paul Kostro, Brian Wassom, Jim Dedman]
- Note to Trademark Office: “breastaurant” is not trademarkable [David Post; earlier here, here, and here]
- Iowa Rep. Bruce Braley, a Litigation Lobby stalwart, seeks Senate seat of retiring Harkin [DMR, earlier]
- Meta? Lawyer files suit over a suit [the Brooks Brothers kind] [Staci Zaretsky, Above the Law]
- Judge Shadur: “the most egregious fraud on the court … encountered in [my] nearly 33 years on the bench.” [Courthouse News]
- Do you enjoy reading Overlawyered? Check back later today, after 9 a.m. Eastern, for a major announcement about the site!
Tagged as:
Facebook,
hate crimes,
Iowa,
trademarks
Assuming the Rutgers roommate/consummate jerk should be facing criminal charges in the aftermath of Tyler Clementi’s suicide — a big if — it shouldn’t be over purported “bias intimidation,” argues Jacob Sullum [Reason, more; Jersey Conservative] Earlier on the Clementi case here, here, and here. And a Boston case has prompted questions about the reach of hate-crime law: “Are Lesbian Gay-Bashers Guilty of a Hate Crime?” [Atlantic Wire]
Related: At Psychology Today, Israel (Izzy) Kalman writes a blog critical of the rise of the “anti-bullying industry” and attendant efforts to criminalize for the first time many personal interactions both verbal and behavioral.
Tagged as:
bullying,
colleges and universities,
hate crimes,
New Jersey
- Couldn’t sue the bees for stinging, but could get a $1.6 million judgment against the emergency room doc [NJLRA]
- Eurodoom: “EU to ban selling eggs by dozen” [Telegraph]
- “Oklahoma’s Unnecessary Law to Ban Citation of Sharia and International Law” [Ku/Opinio Juris, earlier]
- Shortage of generic anesthetics, and what’s behind it [Throckmorton, Great Zs, earlier]
- Hardball litigation tactics contribute to bad odor of consumer debt buyers [Felix Salmon]
- Interview with blogger Carlos Miller (Photography is Not a Crime) [Simon Owens, Bloggasm]
- Conyers “oil spill” bill would slyly expand litigation chances elsewhere [Drug and Device Law]
- Prosecutors deploy hate crimes law against… mortgage fraud? [NYT via PoL] 241 inmates serving life sentences claimed the federal homebuyer tax credit [CNBC]
Tagged as:
debtor-creditor law,
emergency medicine,
Europe,
hate crimes,
international law,
mortgages,
pharmaceuticals
- “Jury Says No to Libel Claim Over Truthful E-Mail” [NLJ, Ardia/Citizen Media Law; high-profile First Circuit Noonan v. Staples case, earlier here and here]
- Transmission of folk music is getting tangled in copyright claims [BoingBoing]
- Scientific shortcut? Veterans Department will presume Parkinson’s, common heart ailment are caused by Agent Orange for GIs who set foot in Vietnam [NY Times]
- Federal hate crimes bill: yes, courts will consider speech and beliefs in assessing penalties [Sullum and more, Bader]
- Texas trial lawyer Mark Lanier’s famed Christmas bash will feature Bon Jovi this year [ABA Journal, background here and here]
- Let’s explain our Constitution to her: U.K. cabinet minister thinks Arnie can close private website because it’s based in California and he’s governor [Lund, Prawfsblawg]
- Ten best Supreme Court decisions, from a libertarian point of view? [Somin, Volokh]
- Cert petition on dismissal of suit against Beretta shows Brady Center still haven’t given up on undemocratic campaign to achieve gun control through liability litigation [Public Nuisance Wire interview with Jeff Dissell, NSSF]
Tagged as:
California,
copyright,
guns,
hate crimes,
libel slander and defamation,
Mark Lanier,
music and musicians,
regulation through litigation,
Supreme Court,
toxic torts,
United Kingdom
Hans Bader points out that a very important motivation for the pending expansion of federal hate-crimes law is to exploit a loophole the Supreme Court has created in its application of the important Constitutional principle, by exposing defendants to jeopardy a second time despite acquittal or dropping of charges in state courts.
Tagged as:
ACLU,
double jeopardy,
hate crimes
