Contemplating a splitup? Grab the family hard drive and get it into your lawyer’s hands ASAP. Such a stratagem “can be best explained to the client as an important first glimpse into the overall actions and conduct of the adverse party in the litigation”. (Scott Andino, “Digging Deeply Into Matrimonial Data Mining”, The Matrimonial Strategist/Law.com, Nov. 10).
Archive for November, 2006
Oz: but where are the clients’ bonuses?
Updating the Oct. 3 item from Australia: “Law firm Slater & Gordon was within its rights to pay a senior partner $1 million from the profits of a breast implant class action without informing clients, according to the Law Institute of Victoria. The bonus, which came to light this week, means senior partner Peter Gordon received at least eight times more from the class action than any one of the firm’s 3100 clients. Their payouts ranged from a few hundred dollars up to $120,000. However, law institute head Michael Brett Young said yesterday there had been no need to inform the women about the payment to Mr Gordon because the settlement in the action had been authorised by a judge.” (Chris Merritt and Tracy Ong, “Law firm ‘in rights’ on payout”, The Australian, Sept. 16). For allegations that the $1 million was improperly paid to Mr. Slater although earmarked as “post-settlement expenses”, see the Oct. 3 post.
Hey, look, I’m suing Cisco Systems
Dr. Michael Hébert opens his mail to learn that the law firms of Lerach Coughlin and Levin Papantonio have been representing him in a class action for the past four years, in a shareholder suit against Cisco. One problem he notices is that the opt-out notice arrives in his mailbox two weeks after the expiration of the period allowed for opting out. And he finds other reasons as well not to be overly impressed by the generosity of Messrs. Lerach Coughlin and Levin Papantonio, even if they are willing to contribute their valuable legal services for a mere $15 million in fees plus expenses. (Doctor Hébert’s Medical Gumbo, Nov. 16).
Update: cosmetics class action settlement
We’re tardy in noticing this, but it’s too colorful to omit: in the settlement of what we called the “no-blush, high-gloss, invisible-foundation antitrust class action” against cosmetics makers over pricing (see Jan. 14 and Mar. 14, 2005, and earlier links) the fee phase continued to generate showy highlights:
A bitter legal brawl over attorneys’ fees has erupted in a national cosmetics pricing class action lawsuit, with feuding camps of plaintiffs’ lawyers slinging allegations of flagrant billing abuses and extortion.
Among the alleged abuses were bills of $195 an hour for work by paralegals who were paid just $30, claims that attorneys and paralegals worked 24-hour or even 72-hour days, and charges of $90 an hour or more for cleaning desks and filing….
Welcome O’Reilly Radio Factor listeners
I was a guest just now on the radio O’Reilly Factor, guest-hosted by KABC’s Doug McIntyre, to discuss the L.A. firefighter dog food hazing suit. A couple more background links on the story, to go with those collected by Ted above: Christine Pelisek, “Dog food caper”, L.A. Weekly, Nov. 21 (“for nearly a week after the original story hit the papers — a tale of racist America making a black man eat dog food — the print media all but squelched the ensuing developments. The only hint of a brewing debacle was an almost invisible, 2-inch-long “brief” in the Los Angeles Times on November 15.”) and Eric Berlin, Nov. 21 (discussing several stories on this site, and disputing the notion that dog food somehow historically evokes slavery) and Nov. 22.
November 22 roundup
- $15M to family of Oklahoma driver who flipped his car when taking a 30 mph curve at 67 mph and passing a car in a no-pass zone. [Point of Law]
- “Jungle Democracy’s appeal is as unintelligible as its complaint and also states no grounds for relief.” [Jungle Democracy v. USA (10th Cir.) (McConnell, J.) via Bashman]
- Reform coming to New York justice courts (POL Sep. 25). [NYT]
- Judge Boggs gets it right at Federalist Society conference: judicial independence is a means, not an end. [Above the Law]
- Speaking of the Federalist Society, Justice Alito gave an entertaining speech. [C-SPAN (Real Media)]
- “Among those swept up under [Georgia’s] definition of sex offender are a … mother of five who was convicted of being a party to a crime of statutory rape because, her indictment alleged, she did not do enough to stop her 15-year-old daughter’s sexual activity.” [WaPo via Tabarrok]
- Signs of a lack of remorse: “In a follow-up e-mail, [Wesley] Snipes directed me to a Web site that praised him for not paying income taxes under the theory that careful reading of the tax codes suggests that only foreign-based income is taxed.” [Orlando Sentinel via TaxProf Blog via Lat; see also ancient Usenet post—I still haven’t fully learned not to argue with idiots]
- Betcha you didn’t know that using the n-word was morally equivalent to killing two people and seeking to profit from it, but if you cut Michael Richards more slack than OJ Simpson, LA Times columnist thinks it’s because you’re racist. [Kaplan @ LA Times]
Judge agrees with exec: the Paxil made me do it
Patrick Henry Stewart stole $1.8 million from his employer before being caught, but he won’t be going to prison; U.S. District Court Judge James Moody Jr. bought his claim that the antidepressant Paxil caused his embezzling, and was sentenced Monday to 12 months of home confinement and five years’ probation instead of the 41-51 months the U.S. Attorney recommended. Stewart had originally claimed that he began embezzling because he was angry over his employer’s reneging on a promised six-digit bonus before changing his story successfully; his inability to control his actions didn’t extend to lying about the scope of the fraud when caught. (Scott Barancik, “Ex-Jabil exec won’t go to prison”, St. Petersburg Times, Nov. 21 (via Obscure Store)).
Dog food suit update
We’d like to take credit, but: After talk-radio-flamed outrage over the City Council’s approval of a $2.7 million settlement for “racial harassment” for a 6’5″ African firefighter nicknamed “Big Dog” who was pranked with a meal of dog-food-spaghetti-sauce, the mayor vetoed the settlement. The “John and Ken Show” website posted photos of the plaintiff, Tennie Pierce, engaging in other pranks. Five council members backtracked after voters started sending cans of dog food to the politicians as a protest, which makes it unlikely the veto will be overridden, even though the settlement was approved 11-1. Hurt politically: the office of city attorney Rocky Delgadillo, whose office continues to defend the settlement. (Sandy Banks and Steve Hymon, “Fury on the airwaves undid bias settlement”, LA Times, Nov. 22)
Taser as cause of death
Lisa Kohler, the medical examiner of Summit County, Ohio, twice listed Taser stun-guns as a contributing factor in the deaths of area men who came out on the losing side in confrontations with police. So now the company that makes Tasers is suing her. (Phil Trexler, “Taser sues Summit medical examiner”, Akron Beacon Journal, Nov. 18). MedPundit is dubious about the suit’s merits (Nov. 18).
Chuck E. Cheese gnat swarm
According to Kimberly Halpern’s lawsuit, her family was visiting a Staten Island branch of the kid’s pizza-and-games emporium when a terrifying cloud of flying insects emerged from a vent and repeatedly stung her son Austin, 4, sending him to an emergency room. Now he’s developed a psychological fear of the whole Chuck E. Cheese entertainment package. A spokeswoman for the restaurant “said that no one else was stung that day, and an exterminator’s visit showed ‘no evidence of a swarm of killer gnats.'” (Janon Fisher, “Suit Bites Chuck E. ‘Fleas'”, New York Post, Nov. 19).