Archive for May, 2006

Update: Milberg Weiss indicted

Following a six-year investigation, the nation’s best-known plaintiff’s law firm is the subject of a 102-page federal indictment charging it paid millions in illegal kickbacks to a stable of docile “named plaintiffs” in its suits, and engaged in elaborate concealment and deception to keep the details of the scheme from coming to the attention of courts, class members and others. (“Top Law Firm Indicted in Alleged Scheme to Pay Plaintiffs for Class-Action Suits”, AP/FoxNews.com, May 19; Julie Creswell, “Milberg Weiss Is Charged With Bribery and Fraud”, New York Times, May 18; Josh Gerstein, “Criminal Charges Levied Against Big Tort Law Firm”, New York Sun, May 19).

Blog reaction: Stephen Bainbridge; Tom Kirkendall; Evan Schaeffer; Greg Mitchell; Jonathan B. Wilson.

Our extensive earlier coverage: Apr. 7, Nov. 18 and links from there.

UK: Police “wanted” posters could infringe privacy

“Detectives across the country are refusing to issue ‘wanted’ posters for [foreign ex-criminals in flight from police] because they do not want to breach human rights laws. Forces said that the offenders had a right to privacy and might sue for defamation if their names and photographs were released.” (Ben Leapman, “Human rights fears mean police refuse to issue wanted posters of foreign criminals”, Daily Telegraph (UK), May 14) (fixed broken link).

“Doctor loses malpractice case, kills self”

Yes, it does happen: “A Florida urologist killed himself a few hours after a jury awarded a former patient $1 million in a malpractice claim.” And this part is especially charming: “Timothy Moran, a Jacksonville lawyer who represented the plaintiff, blamed [Dr. Lawrence] Grey’s insurance company for not settling the case.” (UPI/M&C, May 5)(via KevinMD).

New Tabarrok/Agan med-mal study

Today the Manhattan Institute’s Center for Legal Policy (with which I’m affiliated) released a major new paper by Alexander Tabarrok and Amanda Agan of George Mason University’s Department of Economics. It’s titled “Medical Malpractice Awards, Insurance, and Negligence: Which Are Related?” As summarized by my colleague Jim Copland this morning at Point of Law, Tabarrok and Agan reach the following conclusions:

1. They show that medical malpractice premiums are closely related to medical malpractice tort awards. …

2. They show that medical malpractice premiums are not explained by insurance industry price gouging. …

3. They show that medical malpractice tort awards are related to some factors not rationally related to injuries. …

4. They show that malpractice tort awards and thus insurance premiums can vary dramatically for reasons having little or nothing to do with negligence.

More here and here.

When is a plane more like a boat?

The crash of American Airlines Flight 587 in a quiet residential neighborhood nearly five years ago is subject to general maritime laws, a judge ruled Tuesday, allowing potentially higher damages for dozens of people who sued.

If the result was piquant, the rationale was priceless:

U.S. District Judge Robert W. Sweet said it did not matter that the plane crashed on land in Queens, killing 260 people on the plane and five on the ground. He noted that the plane was on a 1,500-mile transoceanic flight to the Dominican Republic.

“There can be no question that, but for the development of air travel, this trip or some portion thereof would have been conducted by a waterborne vessel and that it therefore bears a significant relationship to traditional maritime activity,” the judge wrote in a 78-page opinion analyzing the issue.

Besides, a piece of the aircraft, though not one containing passengers, did land in Jamaica Bay. So that would seem to settle it. (Larry Neumeister, “Plane that struck Queens neighborhood subject to maritime laws”, AP/WINS, May 9) (via Taranto).

Party like you’re a tobacco lawyer

To celebrate Beaumont tobacco/asbestos lawyer Walter Umphrey’s seventieth birthday, fellow Texas Tobacco Five member John Eddie Williams took over a private aircraft hangar — Umphrey’s own, in fact — “moved out the two private jets and the helicopter, added on a two-story party tent and threw a no-holds-barred tribute to Umphrey.” Music was provided by Chuck Berry, Jerry Lee Lewis and Rotel and the Hot Tomatoes, performing on two different stages, and there was some pretty decent food too. Among the 400 attendees: gubernatorial candidate Carole Keeton Strayhorn. (Shelby Hodge, “Wild soiree in hangar was Western to the hilt”, Houston Chronicle, May 14). Of course it was a mere kaffeeklatsch compared with a Willie Gary or Mark Lanier party.

Now back to your previously scheduled news story about excessive CEO compensation.

Duke lacrosse case, cont’d

Thomas Sowell nominates the controversy’s low point:

According to Newsweek, the young man at NCCU [North Carolina Central University] said that he wanted to see the Duke students prosecuted, “whether it happened or not. It would be justice for things that happened in the past.”

(“The Biggest Scandal in the Duke University Rape Case”, syndicated/Capitalism Magazine, May 17). The comment was hardly representative of anyone’s views but the one student’s, though, contends John Schwade in the Durham News (“Article opts to sensationalize with its color commentary”, Apr. 29). More: Dr. Helen, Apr. 22. Stuart Taylor Jr. has a powerful column on the subject which however is online only to National Journal/The Atlantic subscribers (“An Outrageous Rush to Judgment”, May 2). And guess who’s involved himself in the case, as an advisor to the complainant’s family? None other than ace money-extractor Willie Gary, long familiar to readers of this site (Wendy McElroy, “Is ‘Duke’ Case Headed to Civil Court?”, FoxNews.com, May 16).

NYC sues out-of-state gun dealers

Bloomberg’s crew says the city carried out “sting” operations that proved dealers in Pennsylvania, South Carolina and elsewhere were selling to “straw purchasers” in violation of federal law. (Diane Cardwell, “New York City Sues 15 Gun Dealers in 5 States, Charging Illegal Sales”, New York Times, May 16). David Hardy at Arms and the Law (May 15) says that even if the city can prove such allegations, “I still see major barriers in terms of (a) duty (b) causation and (c) damages. Not to mention (d), standing. I mean — if you can prove a dealer on a certain day was willing to make a strawman sale, does that prove he ever did so in the past? How many times? What crimes were caused or not caused?”