- Bay City, Mich. business finds itself the target of frequent litigant [Faces of Lawsuit Abuse (auto-plays video) via NJLRA]
- An “all-Taco-Bell future”: government nutrition guidelines press restaurants toward “standardization of recipes and methods of preparation” [Suderman, Reason “Hit and Run”]
- Class actions: thoughts on “professional objectors” [Ted at CCAF]
- Report on business influence on California politics smuggles in trial lawyers as “business” [Dan Walters, Sacramento Bee via CJAC]
- Those local homeowners protesting Wal-Mart may be getting support from a supermarket chain [WSJ via Coyote, Dan Mitchell]
- “Medicare soon to go after liability settlements” [Korris, LNL]
- “Use Your Law Deferment to Work for Liberty!” [Shapiro, Cato] And Cato’s also hiring for some video and new media positions;
- U.K.: “Drivers could be over limit after less than a pint under new law” [Daily Mail]
One Comment
Re: Medicare going after liability settlements
When I did worker’s comp defense in Virginia, we had this terrible boogeyman in the woods called the “Medicare set-aside”. It was basically a document where the insurance company screamed that it was NOT shifting costs for future medical care to the federal government while settling a worker’s comp case full and final. And the claimant had to swear up and down that he understood that.
Whole industries have sprung up around this business. But I wonder how easily any of this can be demarcated: a back treatment 10 years after the fact — related to the original accident or not? I guess the threat of Medicare coming after you is enough.
And I’m pretty sure the feds would pursue AIG before pursuing the little worker (or plaintiff, now that they’re doing liability).