- Artist Jeff Koons drops his lawsuit against maker of resin balloon dogs [Legal Blog Watch, BoingBoing, earlier]
- The car pile-up happened fast, the come-ons from lawyers and chiropractors were almost as speedy [Adler/Volokh]
- Andrew Thomas update: former Maricopa County Attorney intends to sue former bar president and ethics investigators [ABA Journal, Coyote]
- Litigation finance: “Poker Magnate, London Firm Bankroll Chevron Plaintiffs” [Dan Fisher, Forbes] Case for champerty pleaded before ethics commission [Podgers, ABA Journal] The experience in Australia [Karlsgodt]
- Judge: Kansas City stadium mascot hot dog toss suit can go to trial [OnPoint News, earlier]
- How National Enquirer matched wits with John Edwards to expose scandal [David Perel, HuffPo] More: Justice Department building a case? [AW]
- “The Whooping Cough’s Unnecessary Return” [Paul Howard/Jim Copland, City Journal] Theodore Dalrymple reviews new Paul Offit vaccine book [same]
- Many trial lawyers yank funding from Ralph Nader operations in pique over his role in depriving Al Gore of White House victory [ten years ago on Overlawyered]
Archive for February, 2011
Deceased Baltimore cop signed, “verified” thousands of traffic-cam tickets
The department claims it was all a computer glitch and that everyone sent a ticket was a confirmed violator [WBAL via Josh Blackman]. Scott Greenfield has his doubts.
Injured by Spider-Man musical? Call now
Saturday Night Live has this lawyer-ad parody (via Lowering the Bar). Note the disturbing prevalence of coupon settlements. More on the troubled production from The Onion.
“Chevron Hit With $8 Billion Ecuador Verdict It Vows Not To Pay”
Daniel Fisher at Forbes has the latest on an unsurprising development in a story we’ve been following for a long time (e.g.). More: Roger Alford/Opinio Juris and more, Carter Wood/ShopFloor, Ashby Jones/WSJ Law Blog (with breakdown of verdict), more from Fisher. And: Carter Wood begins a 3-part series in the Examiner. And who’s more incurious about all the indicia of plaintiff misconduct in the case, BoingBoing or their average commenter?
“Why reinstate teachers fired for bad performance?”
An arbitrator has reinstated 75 teachers dismissed by the Washington, D.C. school system during their 2-year probationary period — not after achieving tenure — for such infractions as perennial absence or tardiness, “rude and aggressive” behavior and “sketchy or nonexistent lesson plans.” “[Arbitrator Charles] Feigenbaum said that the teachers had been denied due process because they were not given reasons for their terminations. It’s a mind-boggling decision that essentially affords probationary teachers some of the rights that protect tenured teachers.” [Washington Post editorial] For another indication of the legal constraints on employee selection faced by the D.C. schools, see this 2001 post.
Law schools roundup
- The first hard copies of Schools for Misrule have arrived from the printer and they look fantastic. You can order here (and benefit me Amazon-commission-wise as well as through royalties) at very favorable pre-publication prices;
- “Can NY Support Any More Law Schools? Doubts Stall Plans for Three New Campuses” [ABA Journal]
- Professional rigor without Tiers: how Canada’s law school scene differs from ours [Above the Law]
- Villanova “knowingly” fiddled scores to improve law school rating [Paul Caron roundup] By creative use of such measures as library seatage, Michigan’s Cooley contrived to name itself nation’s number 2 law school [AtL] Malcolm Gladwell notes that US News rankings “reward Yale-ness” [New Yorker, Ribstein/TotM] A “good way to distinguish yourself from other law schools is to tell the truth to prospective students” and Washington & Lee has shocked competitors with a significant gesture in that direction [AtL] “Applying SOX (or something like it) to law schools” [Tung Yin, PrawfsBlawg] Morriss/Henderson: “law schools have a special moral obligation to tell the truth about themselves.” [Pope Center]
- Mark Tushnet on academic fads and “mere” doctrinal scholarship [via Boyden, PrawfsBlawg]
- Some law reviews admit their circulation has plunged, others don’t admit it [Ross Davies, Green Bag via Caron] “Girls under trees” deprecated as element in law school web design [Lowering the Bar]
- On lawprof interest disclosures [Gerding/Conglomerate, Salmon, Weiser/SALT]
- Legal academy during World War II mostly silent on government overreach [Sarah Ludington, SSRN via Orin Kerr]
“Duluth man fights defamation suit by doctor he criticized”
Dennis Laurion took to the web to criticize a doctor he said had behaved in a rude and insensitive manner toward his family during the treatment of his elderly father. The doctor sued for defamation, and a judge is considering whether to allow the suit to proceed. [Duluth News Tribune and more]
“Polar Bear Plunge” blamed for non-participant’s death, 19 sued
By reader acclaim: the family of a Pennsylvania woman who attended — but did not participate in — a New Jersey “Polar Bear Plunge” charity event has sued the event sponsors and many others. Tracy Hottenstein was last seen alive around 2:15 a.m. on the night of drinking after the festivities, and was later discovered in the bay having, per Cape May County authorities, “died accidentally from hypothermia and acute intoxication.” In addition to the event sponsors, the suit names “the owners of two bars she was at on the night she died and the couple who invited her to dinner at their home that evening. Also named is the hospital where she died and the doctor who pronounced her dead, as well as the Sea Isle City Police Department and individual officers who — the suit claims — did not allow rescue workers to perform lifesaving treatment for hypothermia after they discovered Hottenstein had no pulse.” [AP/NJ.com]
February 13 roundup
- Rules for Growth: Promoting Innovation and Growth Through Legal Reform is new book from Kauffman Foundation in which “formidable” contributors including Henry Butler, George Priest, and Peter Schuck prescribe pro-growth policy changes across a variety of fields [available at Kauffman or on SSRN via contributor Larry Ribstein, Diana Furchtgott-Roth/Real Clear Markets]
- Nick Farr is awfully apologetic (not really) for saying those mean things about Hot Coffee, the new documentary film presenting Lawsuit Lobby view of the world [Abnormal Use, earlier] Related: TBD, more. More: Bob Dorigo Jones.
- AEP v. Connecticut global warming case invites courts to supplant other branches’ role [Ilya Shapiro, Cato]
- Washington jury awards $46 million to victim of shooting spree at Denny’s who charged negligent security [Kent Reporter, KOMO, Seattle Times, earlier]
- New bipartisan Congressional Civil Justice Caucus forms on Capitol Hill [BLT, PoL]
- Oh, Professor Tribe, your rhetorical moves on the Supreme Court and Obamacare are so transparent [Ann Althouse] (& Ilya Shapiro letter in NY Times)
- DRI says “if you [defend] Med Mal cases the news isn’t good,” new filings show a drop; clients may take different view [For the Defense] James Pinkerton on med-mal reform [Serious Medicine Strategy] Jan. 20 medical liability hearing in the House [PoL]
- Jury: “customer of size” not victim of airline bias [five years ago on Overlawyered]
“Discourage litigation…. There will still be business enough.”
Via John Steele at Legal Ethics Forum, Abraham Lincoln’s famous Notes for a Law Lecture:
I am not an accomplished lawyer. I find quite as much material for a lecture in those points wherein I have failed, as in those wherein I have been moderately successful. The leading rule for the lawyer, as for the man of every other calling, is diligence. Leave nothing for to-morrow which can be done to-day. Never let your correspondence fall behind. Whatever piece of business you have in hand, before stopping, do all the labor pertaining to it which can then be done. When you bring a common-law suit, if you have the facts for doing so, write the declaration at once. If a law point be involved, examine the books, and note the authority you rely on upon the declaration itself, where you are sure to find it when wanted. The same of defenses and pleas. In business not likely to be litigated, — ordinary collection cases, foreclosures, partitions, and the like, — make all examinations of titles, and note them, and even draft orders and decrees in advance. This course has a triple advantage; it avoids omissions and neglect, saves your labor when once done, performs the labor out of court when you have leisure, rather than in court when you have not. Extemporaneous speaking should be practised and cultivated. It is the lawyer’s avenue to the public. However able and faithful he may be in other respects, people are slow to bring him business if he cannot make a speech. And yet there is not a more fatal error to young lawyers than relying too much on speech-making. If any one, upon his rare powers of speaking, shall claim an exemption from the drudgery of the law, his case is a failure in advance.
Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to compromise whenever you can. Point out to them how the nominal winner is often a real loser — in fees, expenses, and waste of time. As a peacemaker the lawyer has a superior opportunity of being a good man. There will still be business enough.
Never stir up litigation. A worse man can scarcely be found than one who does this. Who can be more nearly a fiend than he who habitually overhauls the register of deeds in search of defects in titles, whereon to stir up strife, and put money in his pocket? A moral tone ought to be infused into the profession which should drive such men out of it.
The matter of fees is important, far beyond the mere question of bread and butter involved. Properly attended to, fuller justice is done to both lawyer and client. An exorbitant fee should never be claimed. As a general rule never take your whole fee in advance, nor any more than a small retainer. When fully paid beforehand, you are more than a common mortal if you can feel the same interest in the case, as if something was still in prospect for you, as well as for your client. And when you lack interest in the case the job will very likely lack skill and diligence in the performance. Settle the amount of fee and take a note in advance. Then you will feel that you are working for something, and you are sure to do your work faithfully and well. Never sell a fee note — at least not before the consideration service is performed. It leads to negligence and dishonesty — negligence by losing interest in the case, and dishonesty in refusing to refund when you have allowed the consideration to fail.
There is a vague popular belief that lawyers are necessarily dishonest. I say vague, because when we consider to what extent confidence and honors are reposed in and conferred upon lawyers by the people, it appears improbable that their impression of dishonesty is very distinct and vivid. Yet the impression is common, almost universal. Let no young man choosing the law for a calling for a moment yield to the popular belief — resolve to be honest at all events; and if in your own judgment you cannot be an honest lawyer, resolve to be honest without being a lawyer. Choose some other occupation, rather than one in the choosing of which you do, in advance, consent to be a knave.
(see also post of four years ago, when we quoted excerpts)