Archive for January, 2011

January 7 roundup

  • Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen’s firm suing Apple, Google and many others over common web features [Atlantic Wire, Groklaw (“Allen v. World and Dog”]
  • Probably not a good idea to give local authorities cash incentive to snatch kids from homes [Bader, CEI]
  • Hyperlink liability case: “If I lose there won’t BE an Internet in Canada” [Ars Technica]
  • Shooting spree at Denny’s results in suit charging eatery with negligent security [PNWLocalNews.com]
  • More links: “Do securities lawsuits help shareholders?” [Point of Law, Bainbridge]
  • Fourth Circuit revives CSX fraud suit against asbestos lawyers [Dan Fisher, Forbes] “Asbestos defendants want automatic access to info in bankruptcy trusts” [Chamber-backed LNL]
  • Creation of noncompliant consumer financial product is a criminal offense under Dodd-Frank [Josh Wright, TotM]
  • Man sues over seeing contestants eat rats on NBC reality show “Fear Factor” [six years ago on Overlawyered]

Kitty litter manufacturers in court

Church & Dwight, of Arm & Hammer fame, has sued Clorox over comparative advertising of its “Fresh Step” litter brand. At issue is whether the comparison is scientific, per the WSJ Law Blog’s account:

“But cats do not talk, and it is widely understood in the scientific community that cat perception of malodor is materially different than human perception,” the lawsuit said. “Thus, it is not possible scientifically to determine whether cats view one substance to be more or less malodorous than another substance.”

More: Popehat.

“Wakefield’s article linking MMR vaccine and autism was fraudulent”

A British Medical Journal editorial confirms that scientific misconduct by then-Dr. Andrew Wakefield was even worse than previously assumed. The resulting media-fueled panic led parents to refuse vaccination in large numbers, and childhood scourges such as measles soared as a result, with disability and even death resulting. Wakefield was being financed by lawyers hoping to sue the vaccine industry. [Respectful Insolence, CNN, AP, Adler]

“Dumping” law and the absent consumer interest

When the federal International Trade Commission takes up an anti-dumping complaint, the law curiously allows, indeed requires, it to disregard the interests of businesses that purchase the commodity involved. A dispute over magnesium imports also illustrates how different parts of the government can act at jarring cross purposes with each other: even as one branch of the federal government was penalizing Chinese magnesium exports, another was launching a complaint against China for undue reluctance to export (among other materials) magnesium. [Daniel Ikenson, Cato at Liberty]

January 5 roundup

  • Notables including Alan Morrison, Richard Epstein, Kathleen Sullivan sign amicus brief urging court review of multistate tobacco settlement [Daniel Fisher/Forbes, Christine Hall/CEI, Todd Zywicki]
  • “Congress rediscovers the Constitution” [Roger Pilon, WSJ]
  • Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. profiled [Roger Parloff, Fortune]
  • When outside investors stake divorce litigants: yes, there are legal ethics angles [Christine Hurt]
  • Mexico, long noted for strict gun control laws, has only one legal gun store [WaPo]
  • Judge throws out “parasitic” lawsuit piggybacking on Wisconsin drug-pricing settlement [Madison.com]
  • Erin Brockovich sequel: Talking back to the Environmental Working Group on dangers of chromium-6 in drinking water [Oliver, Logomasini/CEI]
  • “Little white lies” to protect the bar’s image [five years ago on Overlawyered]