- Speaking of prostitutes and politicians, Deborah Jeane Palfrey has come to recognize that Montgomery Blair Sibley (Oct. 29; May 4; etc.) may not be the best lawyer for her. [WTOP via BLT]
- Update: Nearly two years later, trial court gets around to upholding $2 million verdict in lawn-mower death we covered Jun. 16 and Aug. 18, 2006. [Roanoke Times (quoting me); opinion at On Point]
- In other lawn mower news, check out Jim Beck’s perceptive comment on a Third Circuit lawn-mower liability decision.
- Update: Willie Gary wins his child-support dispute. [Gary v. Gowins (Ga.); Atl. Journal-Const.; via ABA Journal; earlier: Nov. 2]
- Tobacco-lawyer Mike Ciresi drops out of Minnesota senate race. [WCCO]
- Belfast court quashes libel ruling against restaurant critic. [AFP/Breitbart]
- Trial-lawyer-blogger happy: jury returned $1.25 million med-mal verdict for death of totally disabled person suffering from end-stage renal disease, pulmonary hypertension, oxygen dependent lung disease, and obesity, after rejecting businessperson from jury “for cause” because he was head of local Chamber of Commerce. [Day]
- Car-keying anti-military attorney Jay Grodner faced the law in January; here’s the transcript. [Blackfive]
- Anonymous blog post not reliable evidence of factual allegations. [In re Pfizer, Inc. Sec. Litig., 2008 WL 540120 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 28, 2008) via Roberts, who also reports on fee reduction in same post]
- Clinton’s nutty mortgage plan. [B&MI (quoting me)]
- A supposed DC cabbie’s take on DC v. Heller. [DC Cabbie blog]
Filed under: Atlanta, child support, DC v. Heller, Hillary Clinton, jackpot justice, lawn mowers, libel slander and defamation, Michael Ciresi, Minnesota, Montgomery Blair Sibley, PSLRA, restaurant critics, roundups, tobacco, Willie Gary
4 Comments
In the med mal case, the post to which you link does not actually say what the reason for challenging the local head of the Chamber of Commerce was, so we don’t know that he was challenged because he or she held that position. It is possible that this was merely intended as an indication that they succeeded in challenging someone who is presumably regarded as an upstanding citizen.
About the $2 million lawn mower verdict:
1) George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley is a dolt. Not just on this case. Every statement that I have ever heard from him has been moronic.
2) How exactly does a child or child’s foot get under the mower? There are perhaps 18 inches from the back wheels on the mower to the blade cover. The machine has to be up that length for the blade cover to get over an obstacle. This might be why these kinds of accidents are so rare. Obviously, Professor Turley, something that is foreseeable before the fact should be understandable after the fact.
Bill,
I’ve found out that there is one other advantage to having gone to college. It is a slam dunk to get out of jury duty. I’ve filled out the questionair for Federal jury duty twice and have never gotten a call-up. They even picked numbers past mine (I got a call from the Clerk’s office telling me that my services were not required). The last time I was called up locally I showed up was asked what I did for a living (Mechanical Engineer) and was told thank you see the Clerk for paperwork on my way out.
They don’t want educated people who can think for themselves on a jury. This is true for both the plaintiff and the defendant. They want someone that they can influence. A co-worker told me about his being called for jury duty concerning an aircraft accident. A plane’s propellor struck a “follow me” cart at a small airport, injuring the driver of the cart. He was asked what he did for a living and was accepted when he told them that he was an IT tech. He was almost cited for contempt when he told the other jurors that the driver of the “follow me” cart was improperly trained and that one of the witnesses was full of it. My co-worker had retired from the Air Force as a flight line safety supervisor.
[…] follies in the Palfrey case and in an earlier 2006 Florida prostitution case; […]