- Illinois prisoner sues for land to start his own country [AP]
- “Have you got a piece of this lawsuit?” Important Roger Parloff piece on litigation finance [Fortune, now out from paywall] “Hedge Funds Finance Medical Malpractice Claims” [Jeff Segal, Michael Sacopulos and Wayne Oliver, Forbes via White Coat]
- Criminalizing bad parenting: more scrutiny of “Caylee’s Law” proposals [Steve Chapman, L.A. Times and Boston Globe editorials, New Scientist]
- Deal with ADA complainant averts closure of popular Popponesset Marketplace in Mashpee, Mass. [Cape Cod News]
- Because it’s not as if NYC needs electricity or anything: Bloomberg gives $50 million to Sierra Club campaign to stop coal burning by utilities [WaPo] “Environmental justice” arguments deployed against pipeline that would bring Alberta tar sands oil to U.S. [John Kendrick, WLF]
- Unimpaired have permanent right to sue: Fla. high court throws out asbestos-reform law [PBP]
- Red tape demanded by quality-of-life progressivism suffices to strangle poorer urban economies [Walter Russell Mead]
Archive for 2011
“A petty squabble, masquerading as a civil rights matter…”
People are talking about the Fifth Circuit’s opinion (written by Judge Jerry Smith) in the “disgruntled cheerleader mom” case:
Reduced to its essentials, this is nothing more than a dispute, fueled by a disgruntled cheerleader mom, over whether her daughter should have made the squad. It is a petty squabble, masquerading as a civil rights matter, that has no place in federal court or any other court. We find no error and affirm.
Great moments in lawyer advertising
Because joining your head to Abraham Lincoln’s body is such a great way to keep everything in perspective [Lowering the Bar]
P.S. Runner up? Baltimore’s Barry Glazer [Above the Law]
Number of blocks, doll ethnicity, pleasantness of greetings…
Colorado really intends to regulate day-care centers to a fare-thee-well [Popehat, KKCO]
P.S. As Hans Bader rightly points out, the requirement that day cares publicly avow enthusiasm about diversity also gets into some troubling First Amendment territory of government-compelled speech.
“Boeing’s Uniquely American Right To Take Flight”
Edward Glaeser isn’t prejudging the legalities of the NLRB’s complaint, but is put in mind of the “profound role that mobility has played in our country” with both enterprises and person moving restlessly in search of greater productive opportunity. He is left to hope “that the judicial process will affirm the right of companies, and people, to freely choose their locations. The U.S. economy — especially our challenged manufacturing sector — needs more, not less, freedom to adapt and innovate.” [Bloomberg]
Quest for a risk-free playground
My new post at Cato at Liberty, following on a theme pursued by NYT science writer John Tierney, looks at some of the risks of trying to make children’s play too safe. More: UK Telegraph (“Health and safety fears are taking the joy out of playtime.”); Lenore Skenazy, Free-Range Kids.
The closest thing to immortality
From Dennis Cauchon’s great USA Today piece on the extreme degree of job security for federal employees, almost none of whom were fired or laid off even in last year’s grim economic conditions:
Only 27 of 35,000 federal attorneys were fired last year. None was laid off. Death claimed 33.
(h/t Andrew Grossman).
Amtrak damage limits and the Chatsworth crash
Ted Frank rebuts a lame Atlantic column (& follow-up).
Delaware judges “almost” hostile toward unmeritorious suits
The baseline expectations in our legal system are such that when judges cast a skeptical eye on meritless cases — going so far as to be “almost” hostile toward them — it counts as newsworthy. I discuss in my new post at Cato at Liberty. More: Bainbridge. For more on the prosperous legal niche of filing lawsuits seeking to block corporate mergers, and then collecting fees when the target agrees to settle in order to get the deal done, see Dealbreaker (“Plaintiff’s Lawyer Tax on M&A”), Fox Business and WSJ.
“For the organized bar, it is an article of faith…”
“… that a lawyer’s participation makes judicial proceedings more fair, not less fair.” So should we be shocked that the U.S. Supreme Court does not partake of this article of faith? [earlier on Turner v. Rogers and Civil Gideon] Related: Are we sure we want judges who are “great lawyers”? [Chiang, Prawfs, Greenfield]