If you don’t pay your traffic-cam tickets, the city of Las Cruces, New Mexico says it will cut off your water and sewer service. [The Newspaper]
{ 3 comments }
Posts tagged as:
New Mexico
…break and enter into the house of your client’s husband to retrieve her possessions [Albuquerque lawyer Raymond Van Arnam, fined, sentenced to weekend jail time and ordered to pay restitution, but not deprived of his law license, on charges of misdemeanor criminal trespass and misdemeanor larceny; Above the Law]
Checking out a published report, Erik Magraken contacted former New Mexico state senator Duncan Scott and found that it was true, the lawmaker had indeed introduced a legislative amendment in 1995 providing that:
When a psychologist or psychiatrist testifies during a defendant’s competency hearing, the psychologist or psychiatrist shall wear a cone-shaped hat that is not less than two feet tall. The surface of the hat shall be imprinted with stars and lightning bolts. Additionally, a psychologist or psychiatrist shall be required to don a white beard that is not less than 18 inches in length, and shall punctuate crucial elements of his testimony by stabbing the air with a wand. Whenever a psychologist or psychiatrist provides expert testimony regarding a defendant’s competency, the bailiff shall contemporaneously dim the courtroom lights and administer two strikes to a Chinese gong…
The amendment — intended satirically, one should hasten to add –”passed with a unanimous Senate vote” but was removed from its bill before consideration by the state house and never became law. (& Coyote, Above the Law)
{ 8 comments }
The anti-obesity campaign isn’t the only policy initiative that’s leading to regulatory scrutiny of high school bake sales. There’s Title IX and its state equivalents, too:
Controversy in New Mexico continues over booster club funding and Title IX implementation as discussion heats up over the state’s Schools Athletics Equity Act. The issue remains whether private donations raised by parents through bake sales and working concession stands, or whether philanthropic contributions by private businesses, should be pooled together and distributed among all boys and girls teams under the guise of Title IX equality — and regardless of which parents/teams raised what.
Not surprisingly, many expect volunteerism to droop if the chance to raising funds for your team’s road trip or new equipment is replaced by a new rule prescribing that you can only raise money for school sports generally and hope that some fraction gets passed through to your team. [Deborah Elson, Saving Sports; earlier on booster clubs]
{ 1 comment }
Lawsuits fly in various directions arising from almost implausibly colorful fact patterns (“professor-dominatrix”) at the University of New Mexico English department [Chronicle of Higher Education]
{ 2 comments }
- Plaintiff in case alleging defective clown shoes “does not want any additional publicity” [N.Y. Post via Lowering the Bar]
- Santa Fe’s anti-wireless activists [The New Mexican, earlier]
- Law vs. vaccines, cont’d: “Judge Declines to Upset $22.5 Million Jury Award in Polio Case” [NYLJ]
- Arizona high court launches probe of Maricopa County prosecutor Andrew Thomas [Coyote, earlier]
- “Innumerable histronics” but no conspiracy: litigation over 1996 Filegate scandal fizzles out [Althouse]
- More boosts in regulators’ budgets [Roger Clegg, NRO, OFCCP employment regulation at federal contractors; Koehler, FCPA Professor] Obama’s putting in regulatory hardliners at many agencies; a clue to his politics? [Bainbridge, Judis/TNR]
- If only they’d confine themselves to suing the actual bad actors in FACTA (credit-card-slip) and junk-fax litigation [Bart T. Murphy, Chicago Business Ledger; my '06 take]
- So may bullies ever fare: sanctions set against company that sued BoingBoing for libel ["MagicJack" case and more]
{ 4 comments }
We’ve previously encountered Arthur Firstenberg of Santa Fe, N.M., and his anti-wi-fi litigation. Now the self-reported sufferer from electromagnetic sensitivity “is suing his next-door neighbor for refusing to turn off her cell phone and other electronic devices,” saying his efforts to avoid the fields threatens to render him homeless. He also thinks neighbor Raphaela Monribot should pay him $530,000. He’s represented by lawyer Lindsay Lovejoy Jr. [Santa Fe New Mexican, The Register, DSL Reports]
More: alt-paper SFreeper (which seems to have been on the story first) reports that attorney Lovejoy “is a graduate of Harvard and Yale, as well as a former Assistant New Mexico Assistant Attorney General who has argued cases alongside now-US Sen. Tom Udall, D-NM.” (via Chris Fountain)
{ 20 comments }
Albuquerque Journal, last month: “After deliberating for less than four hours, a Roswell jury decided that El Paso Natural Gas Co. is not liable for the emotional distress firefighters and emergency personnel suffered while responding to a pipeline explosion that killed 12 people, many of them children, in 2000.” Two years ago the New Mexico Supreme Court had allowed the suit to proceed, chipping away at the “firefighter’s rule” which traditionally barred recovery by rescuers against those who caused the accidents to which they were responding.
A New Mexico court has upheld state-levied fines against a photographer who refused a job taking pictures at a same-sex wedding (Elane Photography v. Willock). Eugene Volokh, who has written about the case previously, now has a series of posts on the implications of the court’s effort to force creators to “create speech that they don’t want to create.” He also adds posts on the religious accommodation angle, the inevitable what-about-racists objection, and the role of state laws prohibiting “discrimination” against customers based on their political beliefs. More: Timothy Kincaid, Box Turtle Bulletin (“time for New Mexico to change its law. …ultimately what kind of freedom will we have won to live our lives as we see best if it costs the freedom of others to do the same?”).
{ 17 comments }
- Federal judge rejects lenient plea deal for two judges in Luzerne County, Pa. judicial scandal [ABA Journal, Scott Greenfield] More: allegations of extensive abuses including “rampant case-fixing and payoffs” [Hank Grezlak and Leo Strupczewski, Legal Intelligencer] Charges of impropriety in handling defamation case handed down against Wilkes-Barre newspaper [Strupczewski, same] Improprieties in that libel case denied [ABA Journal] Should juvenile convictions by Judge Mark Ciavarella Jr. be vacated? [ABA Journal]
- Law and a banana: Page-one Wall Street Journal treatment of fruit pesticide litigation fraud [yesterday's paper, PoL] Further: Cal. Civil Justice (“trained like a parrot”, “super lawyer”), L.A. Times and more, earlier.
- “Can it be true that some Girl Scout camps FORBID climbing trees?” [Skenazy, Free Range Kids]
- Katy Perry (U.S. pop singer) vs. Katie Perry (Australian fashion designer) trademark lawsuit [Bryan Quigley, Institute for Legal Reform] Suit has now been dropped [Katie Perry website, h/t @lenejohansen]
- Emergency room blogger White Coat wraps up his malpractice-suit saga [collected posts]
- “Automated shakedown racket sends legal threats, demands cash” [BoingBoing; copyright infringement demand letters]
- More coverage of New Mexico baseball-hit-into-stands liability ruling [Hochfelder/PoL, Stossel, earlier]
- Do not anger Texas criminal defense law blogger Mark Bennett. Just don’t [Popehat]
A New Mexico appeals court says the stadium can be sued. [AmLaw Daily]
{ 2 comments }
If you’re not reading my other legal site, Point of Law, here’s some of what you’re missing:
- Taft-Hartley and the secret ballot in union-representation elections, part of a new category on labor law;
- Also, a new category on international law and international human rights law with coverage of such topics as the Harold Koh nomination, other lawprofs joining the Obama administration, the Alien Tort statute, the proposed Spanish prosecution of Bush administration lawyers, and piracy and international law;
- One form of executive pay they don’t care to limit: Senate rejects proposed $50 million ceiling on bounties paid to informants (“relators”) in federal whistleblowing suits;
- Pay-for-play in state drug-recoupment litigation: Pennsylvania, New Mexico furors just the start of much more to come;
- We’ve heard the line, “Want less litigation after the fact? Then support more regulation before the fact.” Here’s one of many reasons to take that with a grain of salt;
- “File case in Texas. Take plaintiff deposition. Dismiss case, and refile in California.” Asbestos litigation has some of the best forum-shopping gamesmanship;
- Plaintiff’s lawyers in California spent more than $4.1 million in that state’s 2007-2008 election cycle;
- Miranda warnings for company counsel?
{ 1 comment }
- Why real estate agents make you sign 1,000 silly forms [Christopher Fountain] Michigan requires acknowledgment that nearby farms “may generate noise, dust, odors” [Land Division Act h/t Sean Fosmire]
- Albuquerque police take out want ad seeking snitches [AP]
- “A prez must know S of S has no agenda other than his own” Chris Hitchens flays the Hillary pick [Slate]
- Not all British nannies are charming: U.K. regulators may ban “happy hour” in bars [AP h/t Jeff Nolan]
- As Georgia “sex offender” horror stories go, Wendy Whitaker case may outdo Genarlow Wilson’s [Below the Beltway; more on Wilson case]
- U.K. juror polls her Facebook friends to help decide on case [AllFacebook h/t @lilyhill and @Rex7; Greenfield]
- Looking for political conservatives on Twitter? Here’s a long list [Duane Lester, All American Blogger; and I have a comment on ways to use Twitter]
- New page of auto-feeds from leading Canada & U.S. law & politics blogs [Wise Law Reader]
- Bailout’s a lot bigger than you think, try $7.8 trillion with a “t” [John Carney]. Claim: with $ sunk since ’80, GM and Ford could have closed own plants and bought all shares of Honda, Toyota, Nissan and VW [David Yermack, WSJ via Cowen]. What if Citi gives up Mets naming rights? Gary’s Bail Bonds Stadium just doesn’t quite have the same ring to it [Ray Lehmann]
- Australian class action could derail because overseas funders didn’t register as investment managers [The Australian h/t @SecuritiesD]
- 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]
{ 1 comment }
“A group in Santa Fe says the city is discriminating against them because they say that they’re allergic to the wireless Internet signal. And now they want Wi-Fi banned from public buildings. … [Arthur] Firstenberg and dozens of other electro-sensitive people in Santa Fe claim that putting up Wi-Fi in public places is a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The city attorney is now checking to see if putting up Wi-Fi could be considered discrimination. But City Councilor Ron Trujillo says the areas are already saturated with wireless Internet.” (Gadi Schwartz, KOB, May 20).
{ 16 comments }
New Mexico in recent years has been the scene of a little cottage industry in class-action settlements over insurance companies’ allegedly inadequate disclosure of charges on installment payments. Settlements often involve pledges to inform consumers more fully, modest coupons, and impressively large legal fees to the circle of law firms that file the cases. According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, nearly every large insurer selling life and disability coverage has been hit with a New Mexico class action in the past decade. Now, for the first time, the state high court is set to review one such settlement, in a case against First Colony/Genworth. The “settlements have not been free of controversy, with even some policyholder-plaintiffs describing the lawsuits as frivolous and the attorney fees as excessive”; cumulatively they have brought the class counsel more than $41 million in fees. (Thomas J. Cole, “New Mexico’s Supreme Court to Review Award of $6.5 Million in Attorney Fees in Suits Against Insurer”, Albuquerque Journal, Feb. 14 courtesy NM Legal Reform; earlier).
Three years ago we prematurely reported that sanity had (as of that point) prevailed in the New Mexico case where firefighters and emergency medical personnel, otherwise uninjured, were seeking to sue El Paso Natural Gas over the emotional trauma of witnessing the disaster scene after a 2000 pipeline explosion. Earlier this month, however, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled the other way, poking a big hole in the “firefighters’ rule” which traditionally barred recovery by rescuers against those who cause accidents. Chief Justice Edward Chavez wrote that to throw out the emotional-distress suits would be to “reward reckless or intentional acts”. The suits now head to trial. (Stella Davis, “Responders can sue in pipeline explosion”, Carlsbad Current Argus, Dec. 5).
{ 4 comments }
