North Carolina: “The town of Marshall agreed to pay $275,000 for banning [Rebecca] Willis from a community dance hall on allegations her moves were too risqué.” (Jon Ostendorff, “Woman walks with $275k in dance hall case”, Asheville Citizen-Times, Nov. 14 and Nov. 13; Jonathan Austin, “Lawyer says ‘dirty dancing’ case finally settled”, News-Record and Sentinel, Nov. 13).
A reminder to readers in the Raleigh-Durham area that I’ll be speaking at lunchtime today to the Federalist Society chapter at the law school in Chapel Hill, room 4082.
While on the subject of North Carolina, it seems the state’s most famous current politician has started his PR rehab with a talk at Indiana U..
I’ll be giving a noontime talk at the University of North Carolina chapter of the Federalist Society.
I haven’t been doing much traveling to speak over the past few years because of responsibilities close to home, but I’m planning a trip to the University of North Carolina on Wed., Nov. 12 to speak to the law school’s Federalist Society chapter. I might be able to combine it with another event the day before or after, presumably at some town or campus with direct flights to/from Raleigh/Durham. If you’re interested in hosting, let me know at editor - at - [this domain name] - dot - com.
Thursday’s New York Times investigates Fred Baron’s role (Serge F. Kovaleski and Mike McIntyre, “Lawyers’ Ties Hint at Extent of Hiding Edwards’s Affair”, Aug. 14; AP/L.A. Times; commentary at Deceiver, Jeralyn Merritt/TalkLeft, Greg Pollowitz/NRO Media Blog, DBKP; earlier). And more from DBKP here and here. P.S. And I didn’t realize until reading USA Today’s profile that scandal figure Andrew Young has served not only as a loyal Edwards foot soldier, but also as a lobbyist for the North Carolina trial lawyers’ association.
Durham, N.C. lawyer Keith Hempstead says he’s dropping his suit against the Raleigh News & Observer (Jul. 14, Jul. 20), the one that charged that the paper’s quality had gone downhill because of staff cuts. Hempstead said his point had been made by the wide publicity accorded the lawsuit, during which he was interviewed by many major news organizations. (Leah Friedman, “Subscriber drops suit against The N&O”, N&O, Jul. 28). A nameless WSJ law blog commenter takes the view that announcing this rationale for dropping the suit sets up a “prima facie” counterclaim of abuse of process, should the newspaper choose to pursue one. Does it?
I have no idea if the allegations that former presidential candidate John Edwards has a love-child with Rielle Hunter are true–though his actions seem pretty damning.
But let me be the first to point out that, if the allegations are true, Elizabeth Edwards can take advantage of North Carolina’s unusual tort law to sue Hunter for alienation of affection. When we last looked at the state of affairs in North Carolina in 2006, there were 200 such suits a year, with some verdicts in the six and seven digits. Of course, Mrs. Edwards would need a trial lawyer willing to take on her husband first.
Efforts to abolish the tort in the state have not been successful, though it is worth noting the fact that several dozen states have abolished heartbalm statutes without anyone suggesting that this tort reform is constitutionally problematic.
Update: Edwards persuades me that the story might be true when he gives a lawyerly non-denial denial filled with negative pregnants: “That’s tabloid trash. They’re full of lies. I’m here to talk about helping people.” Someone needs to ask a more targeted question of a purported candidate for vice president or attorney general.
So that this man can make his point, North Carolina taxpayers — and people with legitimate cases in that state’s courts — are just going to have to put up with a little extra burden:
A News & Observer subscriber is suing the newspaper for cutting staff and the size of the paper.Keith Hempstead, a Durham lawyer, filed the suit last month in Wake Superior Court. He says he renewed his subscription in May just before the paper announced on June 16 the layoffs of 70 staff members and cuts in news pages.
The paper, he says, is now not worth what he signed up for and therefore the cuts breached the paper’s contract with him….
In a phone interview today, Hempstead, 42, said he could cancel his subscription but filed the suit to make a point.
Hempstead, a former reporter himself at a different paper who says he “loves” the N&O, has duly gotten a fair bit of publicity, certainly more than if he had just sent out a complaining press release or something. (Leah Friedman, “N&O subscriber sues the paper for cutting staff”, News & Observer, Jul. 10).
First you get hauled in by compulsory process, then you start having to look at the emergency room photos: “North Carolina is considering allowing jurors access to counseling services to cope with post-traumatic stress that can occur after exposure to graphic images and disturbing testimony during a trial.” (Molly McDonough, “Jurors ‘Haunted’ By Time in Courtroom,” ABA Journal, May 16).
According to a lawsuit filed by Chase, two Coral Springs attorneys are scamming their clients by promising to eliminate their debts, and then diverting debt payments for legal fees to file meritless lawsuits challenging credit card debts. The attorneys general of Florida, North Carolina, and West Virginia are also involved, and the Florida bar has moved to suspend the license of Laura Hess. “Defendants’ ulterior goals are to extract fees from card members who should be paying the money to Chase to satisfy their debts and to maliciously harass Chase in an improper (albeit unsuccessful) attempt to coerce the elimination of their clients’ legitimate debts.” (Bud Newman, “Chase Bank Accuses Florida Law Firms of Running Debt-Relief Scam”, Daily Business Review, Mar. 6).
Update: See also Mar. 6 Business Week; on-line at the self-reported Rip-Off Report; and WATE (Tennessee), Apr. 2. “‘The programs typically require financially strapped consumers to pay fees up front, so they make money whether or not any useful services are performed,’ says Philip Lehman, an assistant attorney general in North Carolina.”
Another bunch of things not to do if you’re a member of the legal profession.
(Earlier: Nov. 5, etc.)
Re “Two Candidates, Two Fortunes, Two Distinct Views of Wealth” (front page, Dec. 23):
There is a critical distinction between Mitt Romney’s and John Edwards’s wealth. Mr. Romney, as a businessman, made investments that created wealth. Mr. Edwards, as a trial lawyer, made his money through lawsuits that merely took from one pocket and gave to another, and probably destroyed wealth in the process. (Mr. Edwards’s multimillion-dollar medical malpractice verdicts almost certainly hurt the quality of health care in North Carolina.)
Little wonder that Mr. Romney understands that to improve the economy, one needs to expand the pie, while Mr. Edwards’s policy proposals focus entirely on the redistribution of the existing pie without thought for the future adverse consequences to the size of the pie.
Theodore H. Frank
Washington, Dec. 23, 2007
The writer is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
More on the question of pie-sharing and pie-growing at SSRN. More on John Edwards’s trial-lawyer record: the Valerie Lakey trial; Edwards on the failure to warn; Edwards on stacking juries; and Edwards’s cerebral palsy cases (also: April 11 and links therein).
Curious goings-on in North Carolina:
Kristin Wallace bought some very wet land as an investment. Eight acres of it, all underneath Lake Lynn.The Cary woman bought the land for $12,500 last year at a public auction of property with delinquent taxes. Now she is suing to try to force the city of Raleigh or Wake County to buy the soggy land from her or drain it.
“It’s extremely valuable to me,” Wallace said, “dry.”
City and county officials say Wallace, who started investing in real estate less than two years ago, knew the land was lake bottom when she bought it, something she doesn’t dispute.
“It’s bought as is,” said Shelley Eason with the County Attorney’s Office.
(Sarah Ovaska, “Pull the plug on Lake Lynn, suit demands”, Raleigh News & Observer, Dec. 6).
Dwayne Dail spent 18 years in a North Carolina prison on false charges of rape. When he got out based on new DNA findings, his ex-girlfriend promptly sued him for child support. (Mandy Locke, “Dail, expecting $360,000, sued by ex-girlfriend”, Raleigh News & Observer, Oct. 24; “Wrongly Convicted Man Sued for Child Support”, WRAL, Oct. 23; “Prosecutor: Wrongful Conviction Is ‘Nightmare’”, WRAL, Aug. 29; “Dwayne Dail responds to lawsuit”, Goldsboro News-Argus, Oct. 28).
Gruesome life-changing injuries from tug-of-war matches (e.g., Colorado, Oct. 12; North Carolina, 2003; Taiwan, 1997; Tennessee, 1995) are rare, but not unheard of. Safety measures on tug-of-war ropes are possible. Do everyday ropes, used for a variety of purposes other than tug-of-war, need warning labels? Do previous injuries put the Colorado school district on notice: i.e., does a single publicized injury now make every school district effectively strictly liable if future injuries occur? What happens when tug-warriors disregard safety rules because the obvious risk of wrapping rope around a body part is not clearly spelled out? (Keep in mind in the Stella Liebeck McDonald’s coffee case, the plaintiffs complained that the coffee-cup warning that the beverage was hot wasn’t clear enough about the risk of injury.)
More coverage of the Sears wheel-alignment case (see May 18) in which lawyers were slated to get $1 million and the client class $2,402 (not $2,402 apiece — $2,402 in the aggregate):
A North Carolina judge has harshly criticized the settlement of a class-action lawsuit in which a Wilmington lawyer and colleagues received $950,000 in fees while consumers who Sears overcharged across the country were reimbursed a total of $2,402.Superior Court Judge Ben Tennille decried the excessive fees and the lack of effort made to reach customers who had paid too much for wheel alignments at Sears automotive centers. Tennille, who specializes in complex business cases, criticized Sears and the lawyers for trying to hide the settlement results from him.
“Their efforts to keep the results secret are understandable,” Tennille wrote in his May decision. “The shocking incongruity between class benefit and the fees … leave the appearance of collusion and cannot help but to tarnish the public perception of the legal profession.”…
“Doing the math in this case is easy,” the judge wrote. “For each class member who received a $10 check or $4 coupon, plaintiffs’ counsel received just shy of $3,000.”
(Joseph Neff, “Fleeced Sears patrons shorted again in settlement”, Raleigh News & Observer, Jul. 23; Ed Cone, Jul. 24). The settlement was initially brought to a wider audience’s attention by Nick Pace of the Rand Corporation at Consumer Law & Policy blog (May 17).
Point of Law Volokh