Overlawyered: Chronicling The High Cost Of Our Legal System

Archive for November, 2007

The right to be injured, redux?

Power tools manufacturer Black & Decker Corp. rejected Victor Breehne for a ”highly wrist-sensitive job” at a Tennessee plant after medical tests suggested that Breehne was vulnerable to carpal-tunnel syndrome. Now he’s suing, charging that the rejection violates the Americans with Disabilities Act:

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has challenged the use of such tests, which aren’t uncommon in manufacturing settings, on ADA grounds. But it lost a federal lawsuit in 2001 against Rockwell Automation Inc. after that company denied jobs to 72 applicants at an Illinois plant.

(Allison Connolly, “B&D sued after it rescinds job offer”, Baltimore Sun, Oct. 16; “Man sues after job offer rescinded over carpal tunnel test”, Reliable Plant, Oct. 17). For the 2002 U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Echabazal v. Chevron, in which the Court (over vociferous protests from some disabled-rights advocates) unanimously ruled that an employer was not obliged to hire a disabled applicant who was at greater risk of injury and death than other workers, see Mar. 1-3, 2002 and links from there.

Filed under: , , , ,

The case for the telecom immunity bill II

John Ashcroft in the New York Times:

One of our nation’s most important comparative advantages over our adversaries is the creativity and robustness of the private sector. To cut ourselves off from that advantage would amount to a form of unilateral disarmament.

Yet if we allow the litigation to continue, that is precisely what we will do. The message that will be sent to American companies is that they can be exposed to crippling lawsuits for helping the government with national security activities that they are explicitly assured are legal. The only rational response would be for companies to adopt an attitude of extreme wariness, even in the most urgent or clear-cut situations. To put the matter plainly, this puts American lives at risk.

Earlier.

“Wetzel Law Firm: Retract ‘Weasel’ or Else”

“Threatened with a potential defamation suit, two individuals have apparently retracted their claimed characterization of a Spokane, Wash.-area law firm formerly known as ‘Wetzel & Wetzel’ as ‘Weasel & Weasel.'” Jim MacDonald, president of the Bayview, Idaho Chamber of Commerce, “read a letter of contrition” at the chamber’s regular monthly meeting “as demanded” by the offended lawyers. Does this mean we’re going to get in trouble with our earlier references to Cruel & Boring, We’ll Getcha & Mangle Ya, Huge Cupboards of Greed, etc.? (Martha Neil, ABA Journal, Oct. 25; Herb Huseland, “Bayview News: Law firm claims slander”, Spokane Statesman-Review, Oct. 25).

P.S. Australian lawyer Stumbling Tumblr adds, “there’s no indication in the story whether weasels had also threatened proceedings”.

Filed under: , , , , ,

Don’t

Another bunch of things not to do if you’re a member of the legal profession, all courtesy Law.com:

  • Don’t forge a judge’s name to a judicial order to lull your clients into thinking you’re properly pursuing their case [Laurence S. Jurman of Dix Hills, N.Y., who’s pleaded not guilty to the above allegations; NYLJ]

  • Don’t fail to inform your client in a criminal-defense trial that you yourself are facing criminal charges on charges of stalking in the same court [Steven Olitsky of Irvington, N.J., whose convicted client is arguing ineffectiveness of counsel on the grounds that the eventually-disbarred Olitsky was in no position to negotiate effectively with prosecutors; NJLJ]

  • Don’t read golf magazines during depositions or leave your client alone and unrepresented by walking out of an important deposition [Jonathan D. Herbst of Philadelphia’s Margolis Edelstein; client’s loss of $11 million defamation case led to professional liability award recently reinstated by Pa. high court; Legal Intelligencer]
Earlier entries in this series: Jun. 4, etc.

Filed under: , ,

Abusive cop’s stress at being fired results in disability

Milwaukee cop Robert Henry was fired after being caught on tape in 2002 roughing up an arrested suspect. A federal judge has now ruled against Henry’s lawsuit over his firing. However, that doesn’t mean taxpayers are off the hook for the wayward officer’s continued support: “Henry was not criminally charged, and he later successfully filed for lifelong disability payments after he said he suffered stress for being fired. He remains on disability leave from MPD.” (John Diedrich, “Proof & Hearsay” (Journal-Sentinel blog), Nov. 1).

Filed under: , , ,

No naming the blackmailed royal — even on US websites?

Legally hazardous for a US-based website to make itself available for British readers to visit? “[Attorney Giovanni] Di Stefano claims that he has consulted several QCs and has been told that British authorities could have powers to act against foreign-based broadcasters and websites and issue a European arrest warrant. They could be liable for breaching an English court order guaranteeing anonymity to the blackmail victim and witnesses if their speculation reached Britain.” (Adam Fresco and Dominic Kennedy, “Charge anyone naming Royal ‘victim’, says accused’s lawyer”, Times Online, Oct. 31).

Filed under: , , ,