From the Blue-Ribbon Excuses file, via Obscure Store and a puckishly written account by Mark Morey in the Yakima Herald-Republic.
Archive for 2010
U.K.: “School ‘no touch’ rules to be scrapped”
“‘No touch’ rules discouraging teachers from restraining and comforting children are to be scrapped, Education Secretary Michael Gove has said.” [BBC] And the incoming Cameron government is proceeding with a previously signaled broad effort to roll back excessive health and safety rules that discourage harmless goings-on in schools, workplaces and the community [BBC, earlier] On the other hand, the Conservatives intend to go forward with most of a package of new measures devised by the previous Labour government that would expand discrimination and harassment law in the direction of wide-open U.S.-style rights to sue [Telegraph, Daily Mail]
“This American Life” on California ADA mills
It covers them in “Act 3” of a show on “Crybabies” (transcript).
CPSIA: Russian nesting dolls, paper clips, science kits
The website of the Golden Cockerel import firm includes a rather elaborate warning as to why its matryoshka are not meant for the under-12 set, at least not since the enactment of the calamitous Jan-Schakowsky–backed law:
the law requires each batch of toys be tested by a 3rd party laboratory to be sure they are “toy safe.” Such tests can cost well over $1000 per nesting doll set! And sometimes, as with our museum quality one-of-a-kind dolls, a “batch” consists entirely of one doll, or only a few, making it totally unfeasible to test.
CPSIA: reserving treasured toys for strictly adult use since 2008.
More: The CPSC has just sided with purported consumer groups and against pleas from the business community in adopting a broad definition of what constitute “children’s products” under the disastrous Barbara-Boxer–backed law: for example, ordinary paper clips must go through costly separate CPSIA testing when meant for kids’ use as part of a science kit with magnets and similar items [NY Times, AP/WaPo (“Kids’ science kits may take hit from safety ruling”), Commissioners Anne Northup and Nancy Nord]
U.K.: “Council outlaws mother-in-law jokes”
At least for its employees: the London borough of Barnet admonishes staff that mother-in-law jokes, “as well as offensively sexist in their own right, can also be seen as offensive on the grounds that they disrespect elders or parents.” [Telegraph]
P.S. Notes SiouxsieLaw, in reference to this case: “In the US, we sue over mother-in-law jokes.”
“The Law of McDonald’s”
Ted Frank has a speech on the perennially popular subject of lawsuits, hot-coffee-related and otherwise, against the giant burger chain. [Point of Law]
“Boy Suspended for Lighter He Found on Way to School”
“It depends on your whole interpretation of what a weapon is,” said the superintendent of the Jamesburg, New Jersey district. “It’s not a weapon as a knife is a weapon. But a weapon is anything that has the potential to cause harm.” Better watch out for kids who bring knuckles and fists to school, especially if they try to smuggle them in in the form of innocent-looking hands. [Free-Range Kids]
“What good are cameras if Gloria Allred isn’t in front of them?”
The Los Angeles lawyer springs another surprise on a gubernatorial candidate in the run-up to an election, this time Meg Whitman, who allegedly didn’t fire a housekeeper fast enough as her illegal status emerged, or perhaps fired her too fast, it’s not entirely clear. [Jim Treacher] More: Legal Ethics Forum (“As always, some question if Allred’s publicity-seeking actions are in the best interests of the client,”), Coyote (“What Kind of Freaking Lawyer is This Lady?”).
Canada: “Human Rights Tribunal rules it can name university deans”
The University of Windsor wasn’t quite as independent as it imagined, not in the face of a discrimination suit over its choice of law dean. [National Post, earlier]
Pizza Hut told to pay $11 million for epileptic driver’s crash
Lawyers “argued that Pizza Hut was responsible for the collision because they hired [deliverer Nicole] Fisk, who had a driver’s license for only three months and had a history of suffering blackout spells and staring episodes.” Pizza Hut countered (unsuccessfully) that Fisk’s epilepsy was diagnosed only after the crash, which seriously injured a mother and daughter in another vehicle. [San Diego Union-Tribune via Lipman, Legal Blog Watch] And yes, it does call to mind the case I wrote about more than a decade ago:
You may think I’m making this up unless I offer a verbatim quote, so here’s exactly what the Washington Post reported in a front-page story on April 8 [1997]: “In January, a former truck driver for Ryder Systems, Inc., won a $ 5.5-million jury verdict after claiming, under the ADA [Americans with Disabilities Act], that Ryder unfairly removed him from his position after he suffered an epileptic seizure, saying his health condition could be a safety hazard. During the time he was blocked from his job at Ryder, the driver was hired by another firm, had a seizure behind the wheel and crashed into a tree. Ryder is appealing the verdict.”