Overlawyered » public nuisance

California high court OKs public contingency fees

Walter Olson — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 12:50:19 +0000

Ted at Point of Law has a post mortem on a decision that’s pretty bad, but not as bad as it might have been. More: Legal Ethics Forum, John Sullivan/Civil Justice Association of California, Wood/ShopFloor. Thanks, by the way, to CJAC for citing my writing in their amicus brief (PDF, see p. 10).

Tags: attorneys general, California, contingent fee, lead paint, public nuisance

California high court OKs public contingency fees is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Courts should dismiss climate-change-as-nuisance suits under political-question doctrine

Walter Olson — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 05:03:36 +0000

So argues Harvard’s Laurence Tribe. [Washington Legal Foundation, PDF (with co-authors Joshua Branson and Tristan Duncan), via Adler]

Tags: climate change, public nuisance

Courts should dismiss climate-change-as-nuisance suits under political-question doctrine is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

“Is Big Caffeine the Next Target?”

Ted Frank — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 10:34:31 +0000

Tim Sandefur asks this only half-facetiously as he reviews mass torts. Of course, as a must-read comment letter to FASB (via the indispensable Beck/Herrmann) submitted by six pharmaceutical companies notes, “A mass tort occurs when the plaintiffs’ bar decides to invest in it.”

Tags: attorneys general, food safety, nanny state, pharmaceuticals, product liability, public nuisance, regulation through litigation

“Is Big Caffeine the Next Target?” is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

WLF on Rhode Island lead paint verdict

Ted Frank — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 22:24:04 +0000

Attorneys Thomas R. Bender, Richard O. Faulk, and John S. Gray analyze the Rhode Island Supreme Court ruling in the lead paint case, detailing the history of the case and note the implications for other public-nuisance suits in the global warming and mortgage foreclosure fields.

Tags: global warming, lead paint, mortgages, public nuisance, Rhode Island

WLF on Rhode Island lead paint verdict is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

“Alchemy in the Courtroom? The Transmutation of Public Nuisance Litigation”

Ted Frank — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 17:56:49 +0000

Those interested in the issue of the growing abuse of “public nuisance” as a cause of action can do little better than to read the law review article by Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP partners Richard O. Faulk and John S. Gray at 2007 Mich. St. L. Rev. 941, cited by the Rhode Island Supreme Court four times in its unanimous opinion rejecting public nuisance theory as a means to sue lead paint manufacturers (via Androvett).

Tags: public nuisance

“Alchemy in the Courtroom? The Transmutation of Public Nuisance Litigation” is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Breaking: Rhode Island lead paint decision overturned

Ted Frank — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 13:33:10 +0000

So AP reports. More details as they become available.

9:43: AP/Boston Globe reports a dramatic rejection of public-nuisance theory, holding the case should’ve been dismissed years ago. Good news that. The Rhode Island Supreme Court decision was unanimous.

5:00: Here is the opinion itself. James Beck has the most comprehensive analysis of the opinion so far; Walter gives thorough background at Point of Law as well as a roundup of other links. The defendants and NAM have released statements; Motley Rice claims they were doing it for the children, which doesn’t explain their self-serving settlement with DuPont or why they asked for a highly inefficient remediation remedy that would have maximized their attorneys’ fees.

Also: Jonathan Turley (who I just learned has a year-old blog with over a thousand posts), who, to his credit, has opposed such lawsuits; OpenMarket; Jane Genova; Publius. Attorney General Patrick Lynch is unhappy about the legal setback to his ~~campaign contributors~~ constituents.

Existing abatement efforts already required of landlords under Rhode Island law mean that lead paint exposure is at an all-time low in the state–evidence that was excluded at trial.

And more: ShopFloor; NFIB.

Tags: lead paint, Motley Rice, public nuisance, Rhode Island, state high courts

Breaking: Rhode Island lead paint decision overturned is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Sebok on the Rhode Island Supreme Court lead paint arguments

Ted Frank — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 13:37:33 +0000

According to professor Tony Sebok, both sides botched the May 15 oral argument (available on webcast) over the multi-billion dollar lead-paint “public nuisance” judgment, but the plaintiffs botched it worse. Sebok predicts “that the Rhode Island Supreme Court will understand what is at stake in this case, and do the right thing. It will act like a responsible common law court and interpret the doctrine of public nuisance in a principled way—which in this case means drawing the line between tort and public nuisance, and drawing that line in favor of the defendants.” A decision is expected by July 4.

(Disclosure: I purchased stock in Sherwin-Williams and NL Industries shortly after the oral argument.)

Tags: lead paint, public nuisance, Rhode Island

Sebok on the Rhode Island Supreme Court lead paint arguments is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

March 1 roundup

Ted Frank — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 09:22:23 +0000

Oregon Supreme Court plays chicken with SCOTUS over $79.5 million punitive damages award in Williams v. Philip Morris case. [Sebok @ Findlaw; Krauss @ IBD; POL Feb. 1]
Speaking of punitive damages, I did a podcast on Exxon Shipping v. Baker. I can’t bear to listen to it, so let me know how I did. [Frank @ Fed Soc]
Arkansas case alleged legal sale of pseudoephedrine was “nuisance” because meth-makers would buy it; case dismissed. [Beck/Herrmann]. This is why I’ve stockpiled Sudafed.
Lawyers advertise for refinery explosion victims before fire goes out. [Hou Chron/TLR]
Connecticut Supreme Court: cat-attack victim can sue without showing past history of violence by animal. [On Point] Looking forward to comments from all the anti-reformers who claim to oppose reform because they’re against the abrogation of the common law.
Op-ed on the Great White fire deep pockets phenomenon. [SE Texas Record; earlier: Feb. 2]
“FISA lawsuits come from Twilight Zone.” [Hillyer @ Examiner]
Legislative action on various medical malpractice tweaking in Colorado, Hawaii, and Wyoming. [TortsProf]
Request for unemployment benefits: why fire me just because I asked staffers for a prostitute? [Des Moines Register]
“So much for seduction and romance; bring in the MBAs and lawyers.” [Mac Donald @ City Journal; contra Belle Lettre; contra contra Dank]
Where is the Canadian Brandeis standing up for free speech? [Kay @ National Post]
In defense of lobbying. [Krauthammer @ WaPo]

Tags: Arkansas, Canada, chasing clients, Colorado, common law, Connecticut, deep pocket, Exxon, Exxon Shipping v. Baker, FISA, free speech, Hawaii, Heather Mac Donald, lobbyists, Oregon, Philip Morris v. Williams, pseudoephedrine, public nuisance, punitive damages, regulation through litigation, Rhode Island Station nightclub fire, roundups, Ted Frank, tort reform, unemployment benefits, Wyoming

March 1 roundup is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

February 5 roundup

Ted Frank — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 18:46:54 +0000

John Ritter’s family has already received $14 million in settlements, seeking $67 million more in medical malpractice litigation for ER failure to diagnose rare heart condition. Dr. R.W. Donnell thinks they’re wrong. [LA Times; USA Today; Kevin MD; Turkewitz; Overlawyered Sep. 2004]
Speaking of the celebrity bonus in litigation: as M.E. e-mailed me, “Cheek rides again”; Wesley Snipes acquitted of tax felonies, though convicted of misdemeanors, and still on the hook for $17 million in taxes plus penalties. [NY Times; earlier]
California AG Jerry Brown continuing bogus carbon dioxide “public nuisance” lawsuit against automakers [Stirling & Sandefur @ Investor's Business Daily; earlier]
Words-only criminal obscenity prosecution. [WSJ Law Blog (and farewell to Peter Lattman)]
In the category of gambits we’re sympathetic to, but are unlikely to succeed: East Texas burger restaurant tries mandatory-arbitration-by-posted-window-notice [TortsProf]
Mikal Watts puff piece [Corpus Christi Caller-Times]

Tags: arbitration, climate change, free speech, Jerry Brown, John Ritter, medical malpractice, Mikal Watts, public nuisance, Wesley Snipes

February 5 roundup is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system