• Judge Henry Lackey, who went to feds to report bribe attempt by Dickie Scruggs associate, gets award and standing ovations at Mississippi bar convention, says he was just doing a judge’s job [NMC/Folo]
• Related: should Ole Miss Chancellor Robert Khayat have used official university stationery for his letter pleading leniency for chum/ benefactor Scruggs? [Daily Mississippian and editorial via YallPolitics, continuing coverage at Folo; earlier]
• Stephen Dubner: if lawyer/subscriber can sue Raleigh News & Observer over perceived decline in its quality, who’s next? [NYT/Freakonomics blog, earlier]
• Maneuvering over retrial of Kentucky fen-phen defendants Gallion and Cunningham [Lexington Herald-Leader]
• A Fieger sideshow: though acquitted in recent campaign laundering prosecution, controversial lawyer fared less well in lawsuit against Michigan AG Michael Cox; Sixth Circuit tossed that suit and upheld order that Fieger fork over attorney fees to Michigan Supreme Court Justice Stephen Markman over subjecting the justice to unfounded vilification [ABA Journal; fixed typo on Circuit]
• Citing long history of frivolous litigation, federal judge in central Texas fines disbarred lawyer Charles Edward Lincoln and his client and bans Lincoln from bringing any more federal suits [SE Texas Record]
• Faced with $18 million legal-malpractice jury verdict, Indiana labor law firm stays in business by agreeing to make token payment, then gang up on its liability insurer for the rest [Indianapolis Business Journal, Ketzenberger/Indy Star via ABA Journal]

Hoosiers who bought losing Cash Blast tickets may be eligible to claim refunds… at least if they’ve held on to tickets in the now-defunct game from the period May 2005-July 2006. (Jeremy Herb, “$20M lawsuit against Hoosier Lottery gets class-action status”, Indianapolis Star, Jul. 10).

In October 2006, we reported on a $20 million jackpot justice verdict:

Ted Fields was injured in an auto accident with Jimmy Woodley; Woodley’s insurer went bankrupt, so Fields, on January 30, 1997, asked Allstate to pay $25,000 in medical bills and lost wages. Allstate sent Fields forms to fill out, and he did so three weeks later; when Allstate didn’t pay instantaneously, he sued them in March 1997 for bad faith. Fields turned the discovery process into a far-reaching investigation of all of Allstate’s claim procedures; the judge refused to constrain irrelevant deposition questioning, at which point in 1999 Allstate offered Fields the full amount of his $50,000 policy limit rather than waste hundreds of thousands in trial. Fields refused; his attorneys filed several separate motions of default rather than litigate the underlying issues after the trial court denied a summary judgment motion. An appellate court found that Allstate was entitled to summary judgment because of the lack of any evidence of bad-faith in responding to Fields’s claims; the Indiana Supreme Court overturned that ruling on a procedural technicality that the appeal was premature.

The trial court ruled that Allstate was not allowed to present evidence that it was not liable for actual or punitive damages or that it acted “with anything other than dishonest purpose, moral obliquity, furtive design, and/or ill will.” A jury, hearing this one-sided sham of a trial, awarded $20 million in damages, though one would hope the Court of Appeals, hearing a timely appeal, makes the same decision it made before. Press coverage fails to mention that Allstate wasn’t allowed to defend itself at trial; the plaintiff told the jury that the dispute caused high blood pressure, heart problems, and a stroke, though then the question becomes why he isn’t suing his attorney.

Today, the Court of Appeals of Indiana reversed.

• Contriving to give Sheldon Silver the moral high ground: NY judges steamed at lack of raises are retaliating against Albany lawmakers’ law firms [NY Post and editorial. More: Turkewitz.]
• When strong laws prove weak: Britain’s many layers of land use control seem futile against determined builders of gypsy encampments [Telegraph]
• “U.S. patent chief: applications up, quality down” [EETimes]
• Plenty of willing takers for those 4,703 new cars that survived the listing-ship near-disaster, but Mazda destroyed them instead [WSJ]
• “Prof. Dohrn [for] Attorney General and Rev. Wright [for] Secretary of State”? So hard to tell when left-leaning lawprof Brian Leiter is kidding and when he’s not [Leiter Reports]
• Yet another hard-disk-capacity class action settlement, $900K to Strange & Carpenter [Creative HDD MP3 Player; earlier. More: Sullum, Reason "Hit and Run".]
• Filipino ship whistleblowers’ case: judge slashes Texas attorney’s fee, “calling the lawyer’s attempt to bill his clients nearly $300,000 ‘unethically excessive.’” [Boston Globe, earlier]
• RFK Jr. Watch: America’s Most Irresponsible Public Figure (r) endorses Oklahoma poultry litigation [Legal NewsLine]
• Just what the budget-strapped state needs: NY lawmakers earmark funds for three (3) new law schools [NY Post editorial; PoL first, second posts, Greenfield]
• In Indiana, IUPUI administrators back off: it wasn’t racial harassment after all for student-employee to read a historical book on fight against Klan [FIRE; earlier]
• Fiesta Cornyation in San Antonio just isn’t the same without the flying tortillas [two years ago on Overlawyered]

…for reading a book? And an anti-racist book at that? That’s what FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) says happened to Keith Sampson, a student with a sideline job on the IUPUI (Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis) janitorial staff who ignored co-workers’ objections to a book he brought in to read on his break time about the struggle against the Ku Klux Klan. (Azhar Majeed, “Read a Book, Harass a Co-Worker at IUPUI”, Mar. 5; follow-up, Mar. 6 with links to coverage by Paul Secunda and David Bernstein). Note, in the Secunda comments, that the school appears to have later rescinded the discipline and assured Sampson that he is free to read the book — which the IUPUI library itself stocks — on break if he likes. And: Eugene Volokh, Howard Wasserman.

• Joe Nocera’s recent column on the Vioxx settlement infuriated loyalists of the plaintiff’s bar, and they won’t like his new one on lead paint litigation much better [NY Times]
• Trial of Overlawyered favorite Jack Thompson over ethical charges leveled by Florida bar wraps up, but judge won’t rule right away [GamePolitics earlier, more recent posts]
• Two joggers hit by driver alongside Pacific Coast Highway will share $49 million from city of Dana Point — allegedly the bike lane was too wide — so now here come the concrete barriers [LA Times]
• Do makers of anti-PC documentary “Indoctrinate U.” owe cash to Indiana U. for infringing on its logo? [Maloney, OpinionJournal, Coleman] Update Dec. 11: settled.
• Casselberry, Fla. cop who sued parents after boy’s near-drowning in pool has now lost her job following public outcry over the incident [Orlando Sentinel; earlier]
• Lawyer who says he was defamed by commenters on DontDateHimGirl.com is back in court [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Ambrogi, On Point; earlier here, here, etc.]
• Outspoken blog of BU prof Dr. Michael Siegel ticks off “tobacco control” activists [Beam, Globe]
• Warning label alert: old Sesame Street episodes unsafe for children? [Stier, Wash. Times]
• Furor mounts in and out of Canada over “human rights” complaint against Maclean’s over Mark Steyn book excerpt [Wente, Globe and Mail; Eteraz, UK Guardian; Steyn, NRO; Kimball]
• Judge rejects lawsuit by animal rights group challenging UCSF animal testing [SF Chronicle]
• New at Point of Law: How do all those big cases wind up in Judge Jack Weinstein’s court, anyway?; latest Richard Epstein podcast is on antitrust, Microsoft, AT&T, etc.; abuse of the Family and Medical Leave Act; welcome new contributor Marie Gryphon; Yale Law clinic sues Yale-New Haven Hospital; bar official dismisses concerns about cy pres slush funds; breastfeeding accommodation on the job, via lawsuit?; just what New York needs, a new state law school at Binghamton; and much more.

NYC Mayor Bloomberg’s lawsuits against out-of-state gun dealers continue in New York City, thanks to Judge Weinstein (see Aug. 27, and links therein), but it’s not all rosy for the mayor. As we previously reported, some of the gun dealers targeted by Bloomberg’s sting are fighting back, and one of them won a victory last month:

Questioning the legality of tactics used by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg to sue gun dealers, a federal judge in Atlanta has allowed a defamation suit by a Smyrna, Ga., gun shop against Bloomberg and other New York City officials to go forward.

Although the judge dismissed the Smyrna gun seller’s negligence claims against New York officials, he declared that six of 13 potentially defamatory statements were actionable and cleared the way for a tortious interference with business claim.

[...]

Bloomberg, accompanied by other New York public officials, announced the results of the sting — and the accompanying suit — in May 2006 at a news conference. According to court records in the case, Bloomberg called the gun dealers “a group of bad apples who routinely ignore federal regulations,” and Feinblatt said that the targeted gun dealers had “New Yorkers’ blood on their hands.” Forrester ruled that both of those statements are vulnerable to liability claims.

More importantly, the judge denied Bloomberg’s request to transfer the case to New York, where it would have been heard by Judge Weinstein. (Bloomberg is attempting to get the decision reversed, but for now, the suit against him is active.)

In other gun-related litigation, it seems that Gary, Indiana’s lawsuit against gun manufacturers may continue, despite the fact that Congress passed a law explicitly banning such lawsuits; as in New York City’s war on gun manufacturers, activist judges seem to want to interpret away Congress’s words. (Last week, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Manhattan in an appeal of Judge Weinstein’s ruling allowing the city’s lawsuit to proceed. (Earlier: Nov. 2005)

• L.A. city council debating settlement of Tennie Pierce (firehouse dog food prank) case, apparently for several million [AP/Mercury-News; earlier]


• Lerach said to accept jail term of 2 years or less in plea deal, won’t testify against former partners [Washington Post, Point of Law; earlier]


• No shock, Sherlock: divorce cases said to have the highest rate of perjury in open court [Oregonian via WSJ law blog]


• Things you might not have known about the Duke/Nifong case unless you’ve read the new Stuart Taylor/K.C. Johnson book [Leo, Minding the Campus; Thernstrom]


• Take a wild guess as to one reason doctors are reluctant to communicate with their patients via email, despite the many potential advantages [Medical Economics via KevinMD]


• Latest suit charging casino should have recognized customer’s gambling addiction [Indianapolis Star; earlier]


• One brother kills the other in anger in the North Carolina woods, both members of a logging crew; ruled compensable under workers’ comp [Coppelman]


• My client, the dog: another trend piece on steady expansion of animal law [Boston Globe]


• Prankster gets American U. alumni mag to print erroneous report of two classmates as being gay. Defamatory? [New York Post, Smoking Gun; Julie Hilden a while back]


• Trial begins in Kentucky of civil suit arising from the string of McDonald’s strip-search hoaxes Ted wrote about last year [OnPoint News, Louisville C-J/USA Today]


• Woman who nearly froze to death after a night of drinking sues city, emergency personnel and taxi driver who dropped her at home [five years ago on Overlawyered]

• Litigation as foreign policy? Bill authorizing U.S. government to sue OPEC passes House, and is already contributing to friction with Russia [AP; Reuters; Steffy, Houston Chronicle; earlier here, here, and here]


• Albany prosecutors charge boxing champion’s family with staging 23 car crashes, but a jury acquits [Obscure Store; Times-Union; North Country Gazette]


• New at Point of Law: Bill Lerach may retire; Abe Lincoln’s legal practice; Philip Howard on getting weak cases thrown out; “Year of the Trial Lawyer” in Colorado; and much more;


• Multiple partygoers bouncing on a trampoline not an “open and obvious” risk, says Ohio appeals court approving suit [Wilmington News-Journal]


• Skadden and its allies were said to be representing Chinatown restaurant workers pro bono — then came the successful $1 million fee request, bigger than the damages themselves [NYLJ]


• Who will cure the epidemic of public health meddling? [Sullum, Reason]


• Turn those credit slips into gold, cont’d: lawsuits burgeon over retail receipts that print out too much data [NJLJ; earlier]


• Lawprof Howard Wasserman has further discussion of the Josh Hancock case (Cardinals baseball player crashes while speeding, drunk and using cellphone) [Sports Law Blog; earlier]


• “Women prisoners in a Swedish jail are demanding the ‘human right’ to wear bikinis so they can get a decent tan.” [Telegraph, U.K.]


• Disbarred Miami lawyer Louis Robles, who prosecutors say stole at least $13 million from clients, detained as flight risk after mysterious “Ms. Wiki” informs [DBR; earlier at PoL]


• Indiana courts reject motorist’s claim that Cingular should pay for crash because its customer was talking on cellphone while driving [three years ago on Overlawyered]

• Big news: California judge: contingency-fee lawyers hired by state present inherent conflict of interest. [POL roundup; Santa Clara v. ARCO]

• Must-read post about Westrup Klick’s fishing for clients in class actions. [Cal Biz Lit; Lattman; Bodner v. Oreck Direct]

• Why not let the market decide the optimum level of securities litigation? [Jim Copland @ NY Sun; AEI event; 10b5 blog; W$J]
• More on subprime mortgages. [Frank @ POL; Michael Lewis @ Bloomberg via Kirkendall]
• Watch what you say about lawyers dept.: Filmmaker complains about lawsuit in memoir, gets sued by former opposing attorney for libel [Ferlauto v. Hamsher @ Don Murphy]
• Update on clinic sperm mixup case [On Point]

• Tunc pro nunc: Justice Roberts is a funny guy [Kerr @ Volokh]
• So is this Arkansas attorney. [Snopes]
• Seven years ago on Overlawyered, Pets.com sues Conan O’Brien show over sock-puppet dogs; ATLA tries to threaten senator. Three years ago: $3M verdict (including punitive damages) for failing to fire truck driver who had speeding tickets; also three years ago, motorcyclist runs from police at 130 mph, crashes, dies, family sues. Two years ago, blogger takes big paycut and gets new job.

Notice how in the last few years all the advertising has started referring to the mysterious “Big Game”? That’s because the NFL has sicced lawyers on marketers who refer to the “Super Bowl” without paying merchandising fees to the NFL, including suing Las Vegas casinos that offered Super Bowl parties or special weekend rates for the Super Bowl or contest promoters that offered Super Bowl tickets. (Eriq Gardner, “Super Bowl, Super Trademarks: Protecting the NFL’s IP”, Hollywood Reporter Esq., Jan. 29 via Lattman).

(Update: Frequent commenter Deoxy points us to this similarly-themed Indianapolis Star story.)

Those new referee uniforms the NFL implemented this year have a similar intellectual property provenance. The NFL apparently was concerned at the spate of advertising that used referees in the generic referee stripes, and decided to create a unique look that it could slap a trademark on and potentially market later.

• “[P]rotect good doctors from junk lawsuits by passing medical liability reform.” This sounds much like what we heard four years ago in Overlawyered. [Bush SOTU]
• Update: Autopsies in Comair crash (Sep. 19) have lawyers salivating over noneconomic damages possibilities. Refreshing honesty: “It’s all about money.” [AP/Insurance Journal]
• Driver falls asleep at wheel, blames Ford for resulting accident; Indiana jury disagrees. [Bloomberg/NorthJersey.com] Florida juries have been more generous (Nov. 17, 2005; Nov. 21, 2005).
• Being a minor defendant in a mass tort [Mass Tort Lit Blog]
• Gary Condit’s lawyer asks to withdraw from his “frivolous” libel suit (and roundup of Condit’s legal actions). [Levine @ Patterico]
• More on Abigail Alliance v. FDA [Marginal Revolution]

• More on the new prohibition (Oct. 19 and links therein). [Kirkendall]
• A review of the OJ Simpson book. [Wolcott @ Vanity Fair]
• “This is Ronald Reagan’s party. Why is it proposing Jimmy Carter’s energy policy?” [Frum]
• Congressional Black Caucus: no whites allowed, even for a representative of a majority-minority district. [The Politico]
• Three years ago in Overlawyered: John Edwards’s bundle of secrets
• Seven years ago in Overlawyered: Mormon student actress sues over profanity in theater productions, settles in 2004 for over $250,000.
• I’m speaking at WLF tomorrow morning with Victor Schwartz and Sherman Joyce. [Point of Law]

Justinian Lane responds to my recent Liability Outlook about the Buell-Wilson case (Jan. 4 and links therein). The PDF version has pretty typesetting and graphics in lieu of substance, though I question the choice of Futura (a sans serif typeface designed for display) as the font for the main text, as well as the use of oversized bullets.

I was especially impressed that Lane responded to my criticism of the inaccuracy of the court’s description of the case by quoting the court’s description of the case, and my criticism of California evidentiary rules by citing California evidentiary rules. Lane doesn’t explore the implications of his explicit contention that juries get it right only seven percent of the time, an even better argument for reform if it were true than the one I made. Ironically for a piece that purports to “set the record straight,” Lane has more misrepresentations of my argument and factual errors than I have time to spend counting.

To take a non-obvious one, Lane’s description of the Grimshaw case is incorrect (or at least poorly worded, depending on what he means by “backfired”): comparative evidence in that case showing that the Pinto was safer than other subcompacts and no more likely to explode was excluded over Ford’s objection. (In the famous case against Ford brought by state prosecutors over the Pinto, Ford was allowed to introduce that evidence, and an Indiana jury acquitted Ford.) I leave it to the error- and non-sequitur-seeking reader to peruse Lane’s other arguments, including the claim that the amount of the award against Ford is justified because Lee Raymond contracted with Exxon to receive stock options that, after the share price went up, turned out after the fact to be worth a lot of money.

But let’s give credit to Bizarro-Overlawyered for their new tack of acknowledging the existence of other arguments, even if they still can’t bring themselves to address them head-on or link to what they purport to be commenting on. Judge for yourself.

Insurance Journal reports that the Florida Supreme Court has rejected an attempt by seasonal residents to apply more favorable Florida rules to their claims under non-Florida auto insurance policies:

‘Snowbirds” and other part-time Florida residents who insure their cars back home cannot make claims under Florida laws that may be more favorable to them than those in their own states, the state Supreme Court has ruled.

* * *

‘Although Florida welcomes its many visitors, whether for short or extended stays, we cannot rewrite their out-of-state contracts,’ Justice Raoul Cantero wrote for the high court.

The decision will prevent Lake Wales residents Thomas and Margaret Roach, who were injured in 2001 while riding in a neighboring couple’s Indiana-insured car, from suing State Farm for underinsured motorist compensation under Florida law.

Indiana law would prohibit them from recovering because it permits an offset of underinsured motorist coverage against claims paid under other types of coverage.  Florida law does not permit offsets.

Interested readers can view the full Opinion [PDF] in State Farm Mutual Ins. Co. v. Roach, Case No. SC04-1313 (Dec. 14, 2006).

The Chicago class action lawyer, vividly remembered for his role in the notorious BancBoston Mortgage case, among others (Nov. 15, 1999, Feb. 7, 2000; see also Dec. 15, 2004 for his involvement in junk-fax litigation) is now filing suits against lenders who solicit persons with poor credit histories for more loans. The Northwest Indiana Times kindly quotes me on the subject (Joe Carlson, “Lawsuits targeting credit scams”, Nov. 27).

• In the Supreme Court November 29: Watters v. Wachovia. Also an AEI panel November 28, broadcast on C-SPAN1, 2pm to 4pm Eastern. [Point of Law; AEI; Zywicki @ Volokh]
• Also in the Supreme Court November 29: Massachusetts v. EPA global warming regulation case. Previously an AEI panel November 21. [Adler @ Volokh; AEI; C-SPAN (Real Media)]
• Legal cliche: If the facts are against you, pound the law; if the law is against you, pound the facts; if both are against you, pound the table. Table-pounding class of Gerry Spence protegee offers lessons in emotionally creating jury sympathy worth millions. [LATimes]
• What judicial activism?, Part 7356: Indiana state court judge holds “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act” unconstitutional, complains gun industry supported the law. [Indianapolis Star via Bashman; Indiana Law Blog]
• Entertaining doctor victory in medmal case. [Musings of a Dinosaur via Kevin MD]
• Dahlia Lithwick gets something right; if only it was on an issue more important than a suit advertisement. [Slate]
• Leftover from Thanksgiving: lawyers acting like turkeys. [Ambrogi]
• Ninth Circuit grants potential standing to monkeys over Kozinski dissent. Earlier: Oct. 21, 2004. [Bashman roundup of links]
• Gloria Allred joins the Borat pile-on. [LATimes]
• Speaking of, here’s the future case of Allred v. Kramer. More Allred: Oct. 16. [Evanier]
• Speaking of Allred nostalgia, and of primates, whatever happened to chimpanzee victim St. James Davis? (Mar. 17, 2005; Mar. 8, 2005) [Inside Edition; "The Original Musings"; CNN Pipeline ($)]
• More Allred nostalgia: is Veronica Mars‘ Francis Capra the next Hunter Tylo? Discuss. [Prettier than Napoleon]

An Indiana court in 1855 discerned a right to imbibe alcohol to be among the fundamental liberties of the citizen, and that wasn’t the only court decision holding early liquor-prohibition laws to be unconstitutional. Eugene Volokh has details (Nov. 16).

• By popular demand: Alexis Brennan gives hot chocolate to daughter in carseat, little girl spills drink and burns herself after mom drives away, mom sues Starbucks; press mentions one hot coffee case where plaintiff won, and none of the dozen-plus where plaintiffs had claims thrown out. (This case is distinguishable from the McDonald’s coffee case if the mother’s claim that she specifically asked for a low-temperature drink holds up.) [Indianapolis Star; WRTV]
• Former placekicker and current Illinois Supreme Court Justice Robert Thomas wins $7 million libel judgment from newspaper that dared to criticize him. Newspaper unable to defend truth of its reporting, because its discovery requests were blocked by claims of “judicial privilege.” [Lattman; Bashman]
• Copyright trolls inhibit hip-hop music. Is that a bug or a feature? [Tim Wu @ Slate]
• Judge to class action plaintiffs: tell me about your dealings with Milberg. [Point of Law]
• “Plaintiff draws $1.26M penalty. Judge sends developer message: ‘Scorched-earth litigation’ will cost you.” [Knoxville News]
• Second Circuit: Illegal aliens may sue for wages at U.S. levels. [Madeira v. Affordable Housing Foundation; New York Sun; both via Bashman]
• UK Guy Fawkes crowd forced to resort to “virtual bonfire” because of liability fears over real one. [Evening Standard; apologies for losing the hat-tip]
• Burlington Northern & Santa Fe to artists: don’t paint paintings of our trains or else. [CL&P Blog]
• Borat update: “One immediate handicap the two fraternity brothers bring to this legal battle is an inability to find a lawyer who knows how to spell ‘aisle.’” [Slate]
• ATLA on the offense in the new Congress, but their fifth Congressional target, Heather Wilson, held on to her seat against AG Patricia Madrid (Sep. 13). [Point of Law; Albuquerque Tribune]
• Reliving deregulation debates. [Wallison @ AEI]
• Inconsistent Internet gambling ban violates existing treaty, may result in trade sanctions; Congress must now decide whether to annoy anti-gambling Puritans, American IP content providers, or horse-racing and lottery industry. [Slate]
• Roundup of links on new UK law on derivative suits. [Point of Law]
• World ends: minorities and women hardest hit, as applied to noneconomic damages. [Point of Law; Roth CPA]