Overlawyered: Chronicling The High Cost Of Our Legal System

Archive for October, 2005

“Trailblazing Anti-Tobacco Litigator Agrees to Disbarment”

No need for a public accounting dept.:

In a rare case of thievery at a large New Jersey firm, tobacco litigation pioneer Alan Darnell admitted that he misappropriated money from his partners and clients at Woodbridge’s Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer and has volunteered for disbarment.

The reporter’s description of thievery in Garden State legal circles as “rare”, in case you were wondering, turns out to mean it’s not often the lawyers are caught misappropriating their own partners’ or clients’ funds in prohibited ways.

By bowing out of the profession before the investigation was complete, Darnell saved himself and 140-lawyer Wilentz Goldman from a public airing of the details of what money he took, whom he took it from and what he did with it.

Oh, well then that’s okay. Mustn’t risk giving the general public a peek at such matters, after all.

Darnell, who was known for filing asbestos and pharmaceutical claims, “was a leading member of the Wilentz Goldman team that represented plaintiffs in mass tort and product liability cases. …Big tobacco was his biggest target.” Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer is perhaps the state’s best-known plaintiff’s firm (one of its ads) and is also renowned for its political connections, which have brought it much lucrative state business.

The state’s Office of Attorney Ethics will also be sealing the records of its investigation of Darnell, and it doesn’t appear that there are further legal proceedings against him in the offing. Remember this story next time lawyers denounce the alleged conspiracy of silence regarding doctors’ misconduct (Henry Gottlieb, New Jersey Law Journal, Oct. 6).

Filed under: , , , , ,

Licensing eBay sellers, cont’d

First it was Ohio contemplating a requirement that people get an auctioneer’s license before selling goods on eBay (Mar. 21). Now it’s North Dakota, which is considering whether to force small consignment merchants like Mark Nichols to take instruction in talking rapidly and interpreting hand gestures before listing merchandise for others on the online service. (Dale Wetzel, “Internet sellers may need auctioneer license”, AP/Bismarck Tribune, Oct. 10).

Filed under: , ,

Suing Saudis over 9/11

The plaintiffs don’t seem to have fully factored in the principle of foreign sovereign immunity, which leaves it to the democratically elected executive branch, rather than to the courts, to decide how to handle grievances against other nation’s governments. (Mark Hamblett, “Saudi Charity Dropped From Suit Over Sept. 11 Attacks”, New York Law Journal, Sept. 28). See Sept. 26 and Nov. 6, 2004.

Filed under:

Cameras in the courtroom

Justice Scalia isn’t a fan:

“We don’t want to become entertainment,” he said. “I think there’s something sick about making entertainment out of real people’s legal problems. I don’t like it in the lower courts, and I don’t particularly like it in the Supreme Court.”

(“Scalia Says Confirmation Too Politicized”, AP/Washington Post, Oct. 10). KipEsquire takes a different view (Oct. 11).

Filed under:

BlackBerry crush?

“A court decision Friday renewed the possibility that service to BlackBerry wireless e-mail devices might be cut off for most users in the United States.” (Ian Austen, “Court Ruling in BlackBerry Case Puts Service to U.S. Users at Risk”, New York Times, Oct. 8). However, TigerHawk (Oct. 8) offers some reasons to think that might not happen. See May 2.

Filed under: ,

LAPD faces suit in toddler-shield shootout

Relatives of Suzie Marie Pena, also described in news stories as Susie Lopez, have filed claims against Los Angeles and its police department over the 19-month-old’s death in a shootout in which her father, Jose Pena, was employing her as a human shield (see Jul. 14) (“Family of Baby Killed by LAPD File Claims”, AP/Washington Post, Sept. 27). Jeff Lewis of Southern California Law Blog has some pointed questions for the relatives (Sept. 27).

Filed under:

Ind. lawmaker withdraws permission-to-procreate bill

Following a public outcry, an Indiana state legislator has pulled back for further study a piece of proposed legislation that would have sharply limited the use of assisted reproduction medical technologies by married couples, and banned them for everyone else. “State Sen. Patricia Miller, R-Indianapolis, issued a one-sentence statement this afternoon saying: ‘The issue has become more complex than anticipated and will be withdrawn from consideration by the Health Finance Commission.’ … Under her proposal, couples who need assistance to become pregnant — such as through intrauterine insemination; the use of donor eggs, embryos and sperm; in vitro fertilization, embryo transfer or other medical means — would have to be married to each other. In addition, married couples who needed donor sperm and eggs to become pregnant would be required to go through the same rigorous assessment process of their fitness to be parents as do people who adopt a child.” (Mary Beth Schneider, “Legislator drops controversial plan”, Indianapolis Star, Oct. 5).

The bill would have criminalized doctors’ as well as parents’ participation in assisted reproduction except as provided in the rules. Among details of the adoption-like procedures that would be contemplated for married couples under the bill:

A doctor can’t begin an assisted reproduction technology procedure that may result in a child’s being born until the intended parents of the child have received a certificate of satisfactory completion of an assessment required under the bill.

The assessment is very similar to what is required for infant adoption and would be conducted by a licensed child placing agency in Indiana.

Some of the required information includes the fertility history of the parents, education and employment information, hobbies, personality descriptions, verification of marital status, child care plans, letter of reference and criminal history checks.

A description of the family lifestyle of the intended parents is also required, including individual participation in faith-based or church activities.

(Niki Kelly, “State bill would limit procreation assistance”, Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette, Oct. 4). For critical comment, see MedPundit, Oct. 6, and Nobody’s Business, Oct. 6. For favorable comments on the draft bill, some of which were sorry it didn’t go even farther, see various commenters at the Institute for American Values’ Family Scholars Blog (Oct. 4). (& welcome Andrew Sullivan readers).

More: David Giacalone comments (Oct. 11):

After representing hundreds of children in Family Court, I am well aware of the difficulties that arise in single-parent families (as well as in both “broken” and intact married families), but this legislation is far too broad and far too intrusive to be a valid response to those problems. Ironically, many who would support such restrictions do so in the name of the most famous child ever artificially conceived by an unmarried mother.

Filed under: ,

How copyright clearance problems stultify documentaries

Forty-five percent of the budget for the movie “Mad Hot Ballroom” covered the cost of “clearing” rights to songs. The filmmaker even had to negotiate with the subject of the film not to play certain music, because the presence of an uncleared song playing in the background on a boombox would prevent a scene from being used. A three-word-shout that corresponded to the lyrics of a song would have cost the filmmakers $5,000 alone; they had to cut the scene rather than risk litigation. Carrie McLaren interviews producer/writer Amy Sewell on the Stay Free Daily blog (Jun. 22), and a follow-up post notes how the fear of litigation prevented her from asserting her fair-use rights (Jun. 22), a problem that could be solved by loser-pays rules. (Hat tip to C.N.) More: Feb. 8-10, 2002.

Filed under: , , ,