Related posts

• Was the Garza Vioxx case fraudulent? (1)
• Snapping goose causes slip-fall, the sequel (1)
• September 2000 archives, part 3 (0)
• September 14 roundup (3)
• October 2000 archives, part 2 (1)

Related posts

• “Are we going to be overcopped and overlawyered?” (0)
• WSJ: “Lanier Seeks to Repeat Courtroom Success” (0)
• Vicki Iseman sues New York Times (5)
• Vicki Iseman settles New York Times suit (2)
• Update: New York bill banning short-term rentals (0)

Related posts

• Student: dorm’s ferret ban violates ADA (4)
• UT hassling Longhorn users (0)
• Update: Segway lawsuit against Disney (9)
• Update: Kindle not helpful enough to blind users (7)
• Suit charges slow evacuation of broken Disneyland ride (3)

Related posts

• On C-SPAN tonight: “Protecting Main Street From Lawsuit Abuse” (3)
• October 2002 archives, part 3 (1)
• October 2002 archives, part 2 (0)
• October 1999 archives, part 2 (2)
• November 27 roundup (0)

Related posts

• Furor over Mikal Watts “judges owe us” letter (11)
• Trial lawyers flex muscle in Tex. races (0)
• Texas tort reform update (2)
• Stuart Taylor, Jr. on Sen. Edwards (1)
• Mikal Watts for U.S. Senate? (0)

Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Mikal Watts of San Antonio once tried to pressure a legal opponent into a $60 million personal injury lawsuit settlement by claiming he would have an advantage on appeal because of his firm’s “heavy” campaign financial support to an appellate court’s justices, “all of whom are good Democrats.”

A “nine-page letter Watts wrote to opposing counsel in 2001 apparently was intended to make an out-of-state corporation think the donations could sway” the 13th Court of Appeals in Corpus Christi. The letter was sent to a defense lawyer representing American Electric Power in an auto-accident case. “Politely put, south Texas venue by itself makes this a very dangerous lawsuit,” Watts wrote.

What made the letter unusual was the linking of campaign contributions to sitting justices and the potential of an appeal.

The letter then noted that if the case went to appeal, it would go to the 13th Court of Appeals.

“This court is comprised of six justices, all of whom are good Democrats,” Watts wrote. “The Chief Justice, Hon. Rogelio Valdez, was recently elected with our firm’s heavy support, and is a man who believes in the sanctity of jury verdicts.”

The letter goes on to name Justices Errlinda Castillo, Nelda Rodriguez, J. Bonner Dorsey, Federico Hinojosa and Linda Yanez, and says his firm also has financially supported them. Hinojosa, Castillo and Dorsey are no longer on the court.

“Justice Bonner Dorsey, is more conservative than the others, but has been a friend of mine and the sanctity of jury verdicts for many years,” Watts wrote.

Watts and his law firm in 1999 donated $5,000 to Valdez and $2,500 to Rodriguez; in 2000, $15,000 to Hinojosa; and in January 2001, $10,000 to Castillo. The firm donated $50,000 to Yanez in 2002.

(R. G. Ratcliffe, “Senate candidate played up contributions to justices”, Houston Chronicle, Sept. 5; “Watts’ letter shows judicial reform need” (editorial), San Antonio Express-News, Sept. 15; PrairiePundit, Sept. 7 (quoting Houston Chronicle editorial that’s now offline)).

Blog reaction among both Texans and Democrats has been overwhelmingly negative. “This is bad,” writes the eponymous Kos at Daily Kos. Similarly: Burnt Orange Report, Urban Grounds, Eye on Williamson, Doing My Part for the Left, Capitol Annex. For links to some of our coverage of Watts’s colorful courtroom exploits over the years, see Jun. 9. As a matter of fact, Ted covered Watts’ eye-opening demand letter in a Point of Law post of Nov. 2, 2005.

Related posts

• Mikal Watts drops Senate bid (0)
• Trial lawyers flex muscle in Tex. races (0)
• Texas tort reform update (2)
• Stuart Taylor, Jr. on Sen. Edwards (1)
• Mikal Watts for U.S. Senate? (0)

• More critics pile onto new Medicare “we won’t pay for errors” policy [Orac, Chris Rangel, Universal Health, MedPundit; earlier; plus KevinMD]


• Wisconsin lawmaker wants to address perceived lawyer oversupply by cutting funding to the state’s law school [NLJ]


• What would great authors of Britain’s past have thought of pub smoking ban? [AN Wilson, Telegraph; one response; more]


• As Texas trial lawyer Mikal Watts gears up Senate run, his GOP critics turn for ammunition to a certain website [ChronBlog via Half Empty]


• Holder in due course? Pa. man has left fragrant ethical trail buying up bounced checks and demanding their payment in court [NJLJ]


• One reason for slow adoption of electronic medical records: docs’ fear of wider malpractice exposure [Medical Economics via KevinMD]


• “He knows there is irony in a criminal defense attorney being driven out of the city because of crime” [Baltimore Sun]


• More evidence that Endangered Species Act perversely encourages landowners to make their habitat inhospitable [Adler @ Volokh]


• If you recognize one of your hospital patients as a wanted fugitive, don’t let HIPAA keep you from calling cops [MedRants first, second post]


• Teenager may face year in jail for recording 20-second movie clip [Wired "Gadget Lab" via Harsanyi and Reynolds]


• Behind a judge’s order that GM pay $1.2 billion over a drunk driver’s crash [eight years ago at Overlawyered; case's eventual settlement]

Related posts

• October 1999 archives, part 2 (2)
• Medical privacy madness, cont’d (2)
• May 12 roundup (1)
• March 2000 archives, part 2 (1)
• Why object to HIPAA? (0)

• Can’t possibly be true: Tampa man sentenced to 25 years for possession of pills for which he had a legal prescription [Balko, Hit and Run]


• Plaintiff’s lawyers “viewed [Sen. Fred Thompson] as someone we could work with” and gave to his campaigns, but they can’t be pleased by his kind words for Texas malpractice-suit curbs [Washington Post, Lattman; disclaimer]


• Pace U. student arrested on hate crime charges after desecrating Koran stolen from college [Newsday; Volokh, more; Hitchens]


• Little-used Rhode Island law allows married person to act as spouse’s attorney, which certainly has brought complications to the divorce of Daniel and Denise Chaput from Pawtucket [Providence Journal]


• Lott v. Levitt defamation suit kinda-sorta settles, it looks like [Adler @ Volokh]


• Trial lawyer Mikal Watts not bowling ‘em over yet in expected challenge to Texas Sen. Cornyn [Rothenberg, Roll Call, sub-only via Lopez @ NRO]


• Frankly collusive: after Minnesota car crash, parents arrange to have their injured son sue them for negligence [OnPoint News]


• Canadian bar hot and bothered over Maclean’s cover story slamming profession’s ethics [Macleans blog]


• Five Democratic candidates (Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Biden, Richardson) auditioned at the trial lawyers’ convention earlier this month in Chicago [NYSun]


• Donald Boudreaux’s theory as to why Prohibition ended when it did [Pittsburgh Trib-Rev via Murray @ NRO]


• Speaker of Alaska house discusses recent strengthening of that state’s longstanding loser-pays law [new at Point of Law]

Related posts

• December 1999 archives, part 2 (0)
• October 1999 archives, part 2 (2)
• October 1999 archives, part 1 (0)
• November 1999 archives, part 1 (1)
• March 2000 archives, part 2 (1)

Related posts

• Mikal Watts drops Senate bid (0)
• Furor over Mikal Watts “judges owe us” letter (11)
• You’ll never give testimony in this town again (0)
• Yet another R (Trial Lawyers)? (0)
• Wright on Frank on Chemerinsky on Roberts (0)

Imagine what a credible journalist could do with this story! Sixty Minutes? Houston Press? Dallas Observer? Corpus Christi Caller-Times? Texas Monthly? Anyone out there?

Related posts

• U.S. Silica in the blogosphere (1)
• Rolando Montez’s fatal phone call: JCW Electronics, Inc. v. Garza (5)
• December 11 roundup (6)
• Beaumont justice and the silicosis mass torts (3)
• Winkler County nurses trial, cont’d (0)