- Update: Australian judge tells Men at Work to pay 5% of royalties to “Kookaburra” owner, far less than was demanded [Lowering the Bar, earlier here and here]
- McDonald’s CEO pushes back vs. ogrish CSPI’s anti-Happy Meal campaign [Stoll, Mangu-Ward] “Milk, Coke and the Calorie Police” [Jason Kuznicki, Cato]
- “Lawyer sues basketball star LeBron James, alleging he is his father” [CNN, BLT] Update: judge tosses suit.
- Small business tort liability costs estimated at $133 billion [NERA study (PDF) for Chamber’s Institute for Legal Reform (press release) via PoL]
- Crawlers, robots.txt and fear of litigation: “Some closure on my collision with Facebook” [Pete Warden]
- Now what was Citizens United supposed to open the floodgates for, exactly? [Bainbridge]
- DOJ “entered into undisclosed agreement with Amex to freeze out the employment of exec who ultimately was cleared of wrongdoing” [Podgor, Kirkendall via Steele]
- Easter egg in financial regulation bill could result in new pressure for gender, ethnic quotas across wide sectors of economy [Diana Furchtgott-Roth, Real Clear Politics; Mark Perry with some figures on the degree of gender balance in Dodd’s and Frank’s committees]
Archive for July, 2010
Lindsay Lohan’s legal woes
Found in violation of the terms of her probation and sentenced to 90 days, the actress feels that the criminal justice system has been too strict with her and used her Twitter account to link a Cato Institute paper on the federal sentencing guidelines. Unfortunately for her cause, the guidelines are of doubtful relevance to her complaint. Washington Post “Reliable Sources” columnist Roxanne Roberts and Washington Examiner “Yeas and Nays” columnist Nikki Schwab quote me on the subject.
As I noted, ordinary non-celebrity defendants who get into less serious legal trouble very often encounter harsher consequences than has Lohan. The Washington Post itself reported a few years ago, for example, on some of the life-upending consequences of DUI first offenses for persons with otherwise clean legal records. Cato’s Tim Lynch has some further thoughts. More: David Lat, Above the Law.
P.S. Patrick at Popehat seems to find something incongruous in my stepping into a role as commentator on Lohan’s legal spinout. All snark aside, I did think she did a fine job in The Parent Trap. P.P.S. And so does the daughter of Washington & Lee professor Erik Luna, author of the Cato paper in question.
New John Stossel segment: “The Trouble With Lawyers”
The Fox Business host has an all new segment on a topic he’s visited before. Air times:
— Fri., Jul. 9, 10 p.m. EST
— Sat., Jul. 10, 9 p.m. & midnight EST
— Sun,. Jul. 11, 10 p.m. EST
And here’s a web-only supplement to the show.
“No Suing Your Getaway Driver for Crashing, Court Rules”
California has a statute barring negligence claims by persons injured while committing or fleeing from felonies of which they have been duly convicted. In this case it operated to cut off a case by two burglars who’d hoped to get money by suing a third over their injuries in a getaway crash. [Lowering the Bar; Espinosa v. Kirkwood, No. E048472 (Cal. App. 4 Dist. June 23, 2010), PDF]
“Web’s Worst Lawyer Commercials”
Round-up from Urlesque consists of mostly familiar entries, including the classic “Hellhole You Call a Marriage” from Florida lawyer Steve Miller, who (LegalBlogWatch informs us) has changed the name of his firm from DivorceEZ.com to DivorceDeli.com.
Somehow they missed the following, from Washington attorney J. Michael Gallagher:
July 9 roundup
- Many interesting reader comments on post about jury award against manufacturer over injury on bicycle motorized post-sale;
- Reimbursed for money never paid: “Calif. Trial Lawyers Welcome Latest Ruling on Recovery of Medical Expenses” [The Recorder]
- Update: Defamation suit against travel blogger Chris Elliott resolved successfully [Citizen Media Law, earlier]
- Podcast: Northwestern lawprof Steven Calabresi on McDonald (Second Amendment incorporation) case [Federalist Society]
- “Provost Umphrey claims banana picker reps siphoned clients, money” [SE Texas Record]
- Lawprofs in a NYT flutter about deductibility of punitive damages [Walk, Drug & Device Law] On the merits, Carter at ShopFloor: “Changing Tax Laws to Punish Businesses — Unless They Settle”
- Troubled Pacific Law Center to close in San Diego [ABA Journal, earlier]
- New York high court rules Atlanta exec cannot invoke New York’s pro-plaintiff state or city laws to contest firing [NYLJ]
“Pickle bills” exempt small foodmakers
Old and new provisions in some states’ food safety rules exempt some classes of producers, such as those with revenues below $5,000 a year, makers of relatively safe items like jams and pickles, or nonprofits. Some local regulators — and some more-established foodmakers who don’t like the unlicensed and unregulated competition — are crying foul. [AP/Google via Mangu-Ward]
Who got the lowest settlement from Expedia class action?
It’s a contest! [California Civil Justice Blog, earlier]
July 8 roundup
- Federal preemption of state law: compare and contrast illegal-immigration control with auto and drug design [Ted and Carter at PoL; upcoming (Jul. 21) Cato panel discussion in DC]
- Authorities in Scotland let Lockerbie bomber off on doctor’s note. How’d that work out? [Bainbridge]
- Pay for your rescue: “French tourists may be billed if high-risk trips go wrong” [Guardian]
- Must revoke honorific California-state-rock status of serpentine! It contains asbestos! [L.A. Times “Booster Shots” via Amy Alkon]
- “Zero tolerance for bullying” — nice slogan, but think before endorsing [Helene Guldberg, Daily Mail via Skenazy]
- “The New Black Panther Case: A Conservative Dissent” [Abigail Thernstrom, NRO; earlier]
- $113,800 in damages in pregnancy-bias suit against Lucasfilm, but demand for attorney’s fees could reach $1.2 million [SF Chronicle]
- Trial lawyers fear being cut out of BP TransOcean pie [WSJ Law Blog, Bainbridge, Calif. Civil Justice]
SawStop technology, cont’d
NPR covers a story we had in March following a $1.5 million jury award. The law firm of Boies, Schiller & Flexner says it is ginning up a campaign of product liability suits to demand that power tool makers be punished for not adopting the finger-protection technology. If that isn’t enough, Consumer Product Safety Commission Chair Inez Tenenbaum says her agency may step in. What about leaving the decision to people who actually buy and use power saws, many of whom have said they have no wish to buy the expensive feature? Alas, that’s not how either the politics or the law work these days.