Archive for December, 2006

Imams: we want to “hit [US Airways] where it hurts, the pocketbook”

Six imams (who had just attended a private conference on imams and the media and politics) were waiting for US Airways Flight 300 and decided to act rather provocatively: they shouted “Allahu Akbar!” loudly while praying in the waiting area, refused to take their assigned seats (instead squatting in the front row of first class and the exit rows—consistent with trying to control the entry and exit areas of the plane), demanded use of a seatbelt extension for the morbidly obese despite being only moderately overweight (and then placed the heavy-buckled potential weapons under their seats instead of on their seatbelts), and started speaking to one another in Arabic (which a fellow passenger translated as angry denunciations of America). They succeeded in the attempt to draw attention to themselves; the captain asked them to leave the plane, they refused, and were then arrested; the plane then underwent a 3.5-hour search for bombs.

“They should have been denied boarding and been investigated,” former air marshal Robert MacLean said. “It looks like they are trying to create public sympathy or maybe setting someone up for a lawsuit.”

Sure enough, the victimizers are now playing victim and threatening to sue under the auspices of the Muslim American Society (which was previously in the news for demanding that Muslim cab-drivers be permitted to refuse rides to passengers carrying alcohol) and the litigious Council on American-Islamic Relations (Apr. 25). The provocation, helped along by new Congressman Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), also appears to have its desired effect: “The Minneapolis airport plans to add a prayer room for Muslims, and Democrats plan to hold hearings on Muslim profiling.” (Audrey Hudson, “How the Imams Terrorized an Airliner”, Washington Times/Front Page, Nov. 29; Arizona Republic op-ed, Nov. 29; Debra Burlingame, “On a Wing and a Prayer”, Wall Street Journal, Dec. 6; LGF blog, Nov. 21; “Tale of Fibbing Imams”, Investors Business Daily, Dec. 4 via Powerline blog, Dec. 6).

Filed under: airlines, Minnesota, religious discrimination, terrorism

By reader acclaim: guacamole labeling suit

As its label discloses, Kraft Guacamole Dip hardly deserves the name, containing less than 2 percent avocado. The strategy of “read the label” was one that Brenda Lifsey of Los Angeles elected not to follow, nor did she content herself with the backstop strategy of “ask for your purchase price back and don’t buy the product again”. Instead, she’s filed a lawsuit seeking class-action status against the giant food company. And speaking of artificial ways of making green: “Lifsey has been a plaintiff in other lawsuits against large corporations,” including Sears and Carfax, over alleged misrepresentations of their products. (Jerry Hirsch, “Lawsuit stirs up guacamole labeling controversy”, L.A. Times/Chicago Tribune, Nov. 30).

Filed under: class actions, labels

“$102,009.17 buys an awful lot of pants”

“That is how much the Long Island Rail Road and the Metro-North Railroad have paid over the last four years to customers who have torn clothing” on the armrests of their M7 trains. I’ve torn pants pockets on armrests that weren’t on M7 trains, but never thought to ask for compensation for something that was my own damn fault. I’m apparently a sucker, but at least no one is seeking to add this claim of damages to the obesity lawsuits. Yet. (William Neuman, “M.T.A. Gets Bill When Armrests Chew Up Pants”, NY Times, Dec. 6 (h/t W.F.)).)

Filed under: Long Island, personal responsibility

Social hosts and mistletoe II

What I find so amusing about Dahlia Lithwick’s suggestion of a lengthy warning for Christmas parties isn’t so much the warning itself (others have done that funnier, not to mention the real-life examples), but that Lithwick doesn’t recognize that she’s part of the culture that encourages such ludicrous warnings: in 2003, Lithwick pooh-poohed as “extreme” the need for legislative intervention to prevent courts from going after food providers in obesity lawsuits because, after all, Big Food could survive by “posting warnings.”

Filed under: Dahlia Lithwick, obesity, wacky warnings

Social hosts and mistletoe

Legal hazards of Christmas party-giving (Alan Kopit, Lawyers.com, undated recent; Dahlia Lithwick, “Fa-la-la-la-lawsuit”, Slate, Dec. 1).

P.S. And here’s a report from the U.K. claiming that many employers there are curtailing the posting of holiday decorations at workplaces from stated motives that include avoiding offense to those of other faiths and a variety of safety concerns. (Amy Iggulden, “No decorations, please, it might cause offence”, Telegraph, Dec. 6).

Filed under: Dahlia Lithwick, harassment law, United Kingdom

Disabled rights: the separatist fringe

The ideology of the “disabled movement”, at its fringe, can generate some arrestingly wrongheaded ideas. “Susannah A. Baruch and colleagues at the Genetics and Public Policy Center at Johns Hopkins University recently surveyed 190 American P.G.D. clinics, and found that 3 percent reported having intentionally used P.G.D. ‘to select an embryo for the presence of a disability.’ In other words, some parents had the painful and expensive fertility procedure for the express purpose of having children with a defective gene. It turns out that some mothers and fathers don’t view certain genetic conditions as disabilities but as a way to enter into a rich, shared culture.” (Darshak M. Sanghavi, M.D., “Wanting Babies Like Themselves, Some Parents Choose Genetic Defects”, New York Times, Dec. 5). Cathy Young writes: “The movement [“Deaf culture”] holds that there is nothing wrong with being deaf, only with how society has treated deaf people. … But it’s a leap from this understanding [that deaf persons have suffered from bias, stereotyping and unfairness] to the bizarre idea that the lack of hearing is no more a disability than being female or black. … The majority of deaf people do not belong to Deaf culture.” (syndicated/Boston Globe, Nov. 6).

Filed under: disabled rights

Repeal Day

It’s a proposal for a new national holiday on Dec. 5 marking the end of Prohibition. (WaiterRant, Dec. 5; Jeffrey Morgenthaler, Nov. 7). Nice idea, but what makes anyone think that a nation hurtling in the opposite direction — toward bans on every unhealthy but pleasurable form of food and drink that public-health busybodies see fit to target — would even wish to pay lip service to the principles of individual liberty at stake in Repeal?

For ideas on what comes next after NYC Mayor Bloomberg’s ban on restaurant use of trans fat (PoL Dec. 5, etc.), see Michael J. Nelson, “Protecting You From You”, Dec. 5. More: “So you can’t cook with Crisco anymore? That’s crazy! Is there no respect for tradition? Of all the elitist regulations, this one takes the cake. And the pie crust.” (Althouse, Dec. 6; also Oberwetter, Mangu-Ward).

Filed under: alcohol

ADA: sidewalks still not clear

Ramps and other aids to sidewalk and crosswalk accessibility having been one of the earliest and most successful demands of the modern disabled-rights movement, you might assume that the litigation and expense arising from the changeover was by now mostly a thing of the past. Not so, according to a Los Angeles Times piece last month. In California, plenty of legal action is in progress against cash-strapped municipalities, which say they can’t afford to comply. “The estimated cost in California alone is $2.5 billion. ‘The cost of retrofitting is phenomenal,’ said Gregory Hurley, a Costa Mesa attorney who has represented local governments. ‘Where is the money going to come from?'” The accommodations “include wheelchair ramps at curbs, level pavement, gently sloping driveways, minimum clearances for wheelchairs and crosswalk warnings for the vision-impaired.” (Dan Weikel, “Getting there is none of the fun”. Los Angeles Times, Nov. 13).

Filed under: disabled rights, roads and streets

Judge to Lerach: pay defendant’s fees

So rare and so useful when it happens: “The federal judge overseeing the Enron shareholders’ class-action lawsuit dismissed a $1 billion claim brought by plaintiffs’ lawyer William Lerach against investment firm Alliance Capital Management. And in an unusual move, Judge Melinda Harmon in Houston ordered that the plaintiffs pay Alliance’s attorney’s fees under Section 11(e) of the Securities Act.” Lerach had sued Alliance because one of its executives, Frank Savage, sat on Enron’s board, but Judge Harmon dismissed the suit, “ruling that the plaintiffs showed no evidence of wrongdoing on either Alliance’s or Savage’s part.” (WSJ Law Blog, Dec. 4; Peter Lattman, “Lerach’s Enron Lawsuit Against AllianceBernstein Is Dismissed”, Wall Street Journal, Dec. 2 (sub)). For Lerach’s side of the matter, see Floyd Norris, “In Unusual Ruling, Law Firm Is Told to Pay Opponent’s Legal Fees in Enron Case”, New York Times, Dec. 2. More: And here’s a (subscriber-only) WSJ editorial: “Loser pays”, Dec. 7.

Filed under: Bill Lerach, Houston, loser pays

Site housekeeping: feeds in, newsletter out

I’ve been cleaning up and simplifying the organization of the site, specifically the sidebar on the front page. Many readers already follow Overlawyered posts by subscribing to feeds, and I’ve made that easier by enlisting in the popular FeedBurner service. If you’re currently using a different feed method, we encourage you to give FeedBurner a try.

For years I’ve been publishing a short periodic newsletter summarizing highlights of recent posts. It’s a lot of work, however, and at my present level of commitments I’m obliged to conclude that it’s not a wise use of my time, especially with the feed option providing a similar but richer service in real time (rather than days or weeks later). So for the time being I’m going to officially declare the email newsletter dormant; at some point maybe it’ll be worth reviving in some new format.

Filed under: blog mechanics