- Boy fatally shoots stepbrother at home, mom sues school district as well as shooter’s family [Seattle Post-Intelligencer]
- Problem gambler sues Ontario lottery for C$3.5 billion [Toronto Star]
- Cop declines training in which he’d be given Taser shock, and sues [Indianapolis Star]
- Ultra-litigious inmate Jonathan Lee Riches scrawls new complaint linking Bernard Madoff, Britney Spears [Kevin LaCroix]
- Just to read this update feels like an invasion of privacy: “Judge to Hear Challenge to $6M Herpes Case Award” [On Point News, earlier]
- “Best criminal strategy: join the Spokane police” [Coyote Blog] More: Greenfield, Brayton.
- Will mommy-bloggers be held liable for freebie product reviews? [Emily Friedman, ABC News, earlier]
- Update: “Fifth Circuit says no bail for Paul Minor” [Freeland]
Filed under: advertising, Canada, Federal Trade Commission, Indiana, Jonathan Lee Riches, lottery, Paul Minor, police, public employment, schools, Washington state
3 Comments
Learning, One Blog At A Time…
Via Walter Olson at Overlawyered, I saw this blurb about Coyote Blog, started to talk life in a small business, posting about police misconduct….
Love the Canadian gambler suit..simply love it. Guy has problem gambling, signs up for “please keep me out of your casinos” program. Surely he didn’t just show up, announce himself to security and then strong-arm his way over to the slots where he proceeded to blow a few hundred grand. I have to think he knew he was on a watch-list and as such “might” have taken evasive measures to get in to the driver’s seat. But, on some legal theory that makes mention of some kind of duty(perhaps to protect), this guy has become convinced that the citizens of Ontario are now on the hook for his (and his partners in crime) binges. Nice. I should apply for dual citizenship; it could pay off nicely.
But did the casinos make any effort at all to keep out people who signed the self exclusion form? I can think of various pretty simple and cheap things they could do. But how hard are they going to try, given that keeping out problem gamblers lowers their revenue?