- 10th Circuit: deposition not a “take-home examination” [Ronald Miller]
- Class-action suit over salt in Campbell’s soup [NJ.com] Boom predicted in suits over claims of healthy food [Ken Odza]
- Roommate indicted in Tyler Clementi suicide [Scott Greenfield, Beldar]
- “Ban fraternities” screed in WSJ: were editors trying to make Caitlin Flanagan look ridiculous on purpose? [Ann Althouse, Instapundit]
- Emotional value of family dog: “Seattle should not set bad precedent in pet case” [John W. Schedler, Seattle Times, background]
- Investigating gas-price speculation and “price gouging”: “Obama tries to cap oil leak with lawyers” [Neil Munro, Daily Caller]
- Federal law protects peanuts on planes [CNN Travel]
5 Comments
The Rutgers youths exemplify why the prosecution is overzealous:
-youth act with little through to greater societal norms, and follow peer culture and thought processes that we have allowed them to immerse themselves in
-youths are impulsive
-they do not consider either the likely or unlikely future consequences of their acts on their future well-being
-youths think and act in the moment; what would be a clear act of malfeasance for a 40 year old might only be an expression of thoughtlessness for a teen
Both youths are guilty of all of the above foibles of youth; one has already cast his life away impulsively, but we need not force the same outcome for the one who has in some respects shown greater personal restraint.
Isn’t it the City’s fault anyway, as the GW bridge is a favorite for jumpers?http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2007/11/01/2007-11-01_some_tourists_choose_city_landmarks_for_-1.html
“Obama tries to cap oil leak with lawyers”
If only. Imagine the good that would have occurred if they’d been pushing hundreds upon hundreds of lawyers down into the gulf, stuffing them into the spewing well, trying to do the “top kill” of the blown out. One can hope this is a tactic tried on future blowouts. 🙂
The second linked article on the Seattle dog electrocution case, the claimant says she spent over $10,000 for the dog over his 6-year life including $5,212 for “doggie day care”.
A few paragraphs down her attorney says his client needs counseling but has no medical insurance.
Talk about misplaced financial priorities.
On the Campbell’s Soup kerfuffle:
“The fact that the labels were literally true does not mean they cannot be misleading to the average consumer,” Judge Jerome Simandle wrote in his decision.
Source: http://www.healthzone.ca/health/dietfitness/diet/article/977148–campbell-s-soup-faces-lawsuit-over-sodium-content
Jason Barney says:
“A few paragraphs down her attorney says his client needs counseling but has no medical insurance. ”
Inspiration for a Tee-shirt:
“I know I mean well,
but, I’m not sure I am well.”