Los Angeles Times reporter Molly Selvin wanted my opinion of class-actioneer Bill Lerach for this profile, so I gave it. Holding up the other end of the discussion are Lerach fans Jamie Court, of Harvey Rosenfield’s outfit, and actor/humorist/ expert-economic-witness-in-Milberg-cases Ben Stein (“Unsettling Days for King of Class Actions”, Jul. 23)(cross-posted at Point of Law).
Archive for 2006
“Almost all leakers are lawyers. That’s the bottom line.”
That was former New York Times executive editor Howell Raines’ response to an Aspen Institute audience member’s question about media leaks, as quoted by Greg Schreier in the Aspen Times (“Raines reflects on journalism, loss and lawyers”, Jul. 21).
“Court rules: Mazel tough”
“A Manhattan judge has tossed out a lawsuit by a couple claiming they endured ‘humiliation, indignity, distress of mind and mental suffering’ when they weren’t able to have their daughter’s bat mitzvah at The Plaza hotel. … Although the hotel gave the family six months’ notice [of its decision to undergo renovations, making the space unavailable] and repaid their $12,000 deposit on the planned $20,000 bash, the Alenicks claimed it ‘made no effort to compensate for the uniqueness of The Plaza.'” (Dareh Gregorian, New York Post, Jul. 21)(via Lattman).
Look for the union libel
“A jury ruled Friday that a labor union defamed Sutter Health with a mass mailing of postcards and awarded the Northern California health care organization almost $17.3 million in damages. The Placer County jury found that Unite Here, one of the nation’s largest unions that represents hotel, restaurant and laundry workers, defamed Sutter Health early last year by sending postcards to women of child-bearing age in Northern California claiming the organization’s hospitals used unclean linens. The union was in a labor dispute with the laundry service that cleaned the linens at the time.” (“Jury: Union defamed Sutter Health”, InsideBayArea.com (Hayward Daily Review), Jul. 23; Mehul Srivastava, “Jury award stings union”, Sacramento Bee, Jul. 22).
Jack Thompson, friend of the court?
Great moments in auto regulation
The federal government has decided that automakers may not install one safety option (a front passenger seat airbag turnoff switch, intended to protect kids) unless they also install a second (a child-seat anchor system known as LATCH). Toyota had offered the first but not the second on certain Tundra models, so they did a recall whose point was to eliminate customers’ access to the first option, thus worsening safety for kids riding in front seats. (Peter Valdes-Dapena, “Toyota’s totally bizarre recall”, CNN/Money, Jul. 12). DealBreaker comments: “How badly does the government hate your kids? Bad enough to kill them.” (Jul. 13).
“Don’t lift front of chair while sitting in it”
P.J. O’Rourke writes, “I tremble for my country when I reflect that chair manufacturers feel compelled to tell Americans this”. Later, after a call to a law office about the dangerous folding chair, “The receptionist told me that John Edwards would be over within the hour; meanwhile I might want to start pricing yachts.” Just a satire, folks (“From the editor’s chair”, Weekly Standard, Jul. 31).
Update: Emotional-service dog on nude beach
Mark DelCore, who met with a cool reception from a federal judge at a hearing, says he’s thinking of dropping his lawsuit (see Jul. 14) demanding that his emotional-support dog be admitted to accompany him at a nude beach. The stress occasioned by the proceedings, he says, may be too much for him to press on (Christina Boyle and John Marzulli, “Judge isn’t naked guy’s best friend”, New York Daily News, Jul. 15). (via Ann Althouse, who asks, “Do people who bring frivolous lawsuits ever think about whether their consumption of public resources is worthwhile?”, Jul. 15).
“Something which I would consider akin to child abuse”
For California state senator Deborah Ortiz, that would describe smoking in a car in which a child is present. Writes Brooke Oberwetter at CEI Open Market (Jun. 29): “According to the Contra Costa Times, smokers can be fined under [a bill approved by the committee Ortiz chairs] even if the car is parked and on private property. Clearly California is just a cigarette’s flick away from suggesting banning smoking in private homes: If they can tell you what you can and cannot do in the driveway, is there really much left in terms of precedent to stop them from stepping gingerly up to the front porch and peering in the windows?” A similar bill has already passed the California assembly. (Edwin Garcia, “Bill targets smokers with children”, Contra Costa Times, Jun. 29; Michael Siegel, Jun. 29). Earlier coverage: May 1 and links from there. On the follies of GOP governor Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, who promoted a similar measure in that state, see The Agitator, Jun. 9.
“Meet the original patent troll”
“Troll was a derivative of, er, me,” says Chicago patent litigator Raymond Niro, a pioneer of contingency-fee IP practice:
Niro’s former partner Gerald Hosier found fame and fortune turning Jerome Lemelson’s patents on bar code technology into a billion-dollar licensing business. But Niro taught the patent world a more enduring lesson: Lemelson isn’t unique. Like an irritating mosquito that GCs can’t squash, Hosier’s licensing approach could be applied over and over again, on different patents across different industries for huge profits. Niro has extracted royalties on everything from patents covering hemodialysis catheters to wireless technology used to locate items of interest in online maps. In the process, he’s made some serious royalties of his own: a Falcon 10 jet, six Ferraris, acres of land in Chicago, Boca Raton and Aspen, and a $250,000 gift to DePaul University endowing the Raymond P. Niro professorship in intellectual property law…. Love him or hate him, Niro’s methods have become ingrained in the patent world.
(Lisa Lerer, IP Law & Business/Law.com, Jul. 20).