July 8, Washington DC

The Center for American Progress is hosting two panels on the topic “Legal Services for the Poor in an Economic Downturn,” this Wednesday, July 8. I’m on the first panel with Peter Edelman and Don Saunders from 12 to 1. A “light lunch” will be served at 11:30. I’ve spoken before on this topic in rooms where I was the only person on the center-right, but it’s always nice to see a friendly face.

“Man Burned at Burning Man Assumed Risk of Injury”

“Get too close to the Burning Man fire and you assume the “obvious and inherent” risk of being burned, a California appeals court has ruled in dismissing a personal injury lawsuit against the operators of the iconic countercultural arts festival.” [OnPoint News, ruling in PDF, Bob Egelko/San Francisco Chronicle, Shaun Martin/California Appellate Report (sees ruling as expanding scope of existing California assumption-of-risk defense), Michael Krauss/Point of Law (hails ruling), Lowering the Bar]

Overlawyered turns 10

Ten years ago — July 1, 1999 — I put up the first post in this space. You can read the first fifteen days’ worth of posts here.

Thanks for the congratulations and kind words that have been coming in:

A fortune in his coffee cup?

Annals of bounty-hunting: “A recent ruling on an obscure, century-old statute has opened the door for people familiar with the finer points of patent law to sue companies that stamp their products with expired patent numbers.” Washington, D.C. patent attorney Matthew Pequignot “noticed the patent marks on the lid to his daily cup of coffee, did some research and found that the lid’s maker, Solo Cup Co., was continuing to claim patent protections for disposable lids that had expired nearly 20 years ago.” So he’s sued Solo and E.D. Va. federal judge Leonie Brinkema has allowed his case to go forward, ruling that the requisite harm to the government is satisfied because the government’s laws against “false markings” were violated. (A federal judge in New York, however, ruled differently on the harm-to-government issue in a recent case with similar facts.) Pequignot has offered to settle the Solo suit for $9 million and has sued Gillette on similar theories; the bounty-hunting law allows claimants to keep half of the recovery.

Pequignot, for his part, says he does not expect an avalanche of false markings lawsuits, despite the fact that [attorney Raymond] Stauffer and some others have already followed in his footsteps. He said that, even as a patent attorney, it took him many hours of research to be able to file his lawsuit.

[AP/Fort Wayne Journal Gazette via ABA Journal; Sheri Qualters, NLJ]

Lawprof’s bias suit cites curriculum, panel imbalance

Catching up with a story from a while back: a law professor at Oklahoma City University, Danne Johnson, has filed a federal lawsuit accusing the university of discrimination. Per this account six months ago in The Oklahoman, the lawsuit sounds as if it will raise issues of wider interest. It is apparently based at least in part on the handling of an October 2007 memo by four OCU law professors alleging, in The Oklahoman’s words, “sexual harassment, pay disparity and insensitivity”:

The female professors also complained the OCU law school has no regular civil rights course, criminal law classes don’t cover rape, and the landmark abortion case Roe v. Wade is only covered sporadically in constitutional law.

The memo was sparked by two incidents: the alleged sexual harassment of two female professors at Dean Lawrence Hellman’s home in July 2007 and the all-male panel chosen for a Constitution Day program in September 2007. …

The memo notes the lack of women on a faculty appointment committee, which regularly included two university professors who are “openly hostile” to the idea of giving special consideration for women and minorities.

According to The Oklahoman, Johnson’s lawsuit cites as indicative of the university’s discriminatory stance that its general counsel, William J. Conger, “indicated the issues raised by Johnson and the other professors were misunderstandings or ‘cultural’ issues, rather than legal issues” (via Secunda/Workplace Prof Blog).

D.C. Metro crash client-chasing

Yes, the online ads are already up. Washington’s City Paper tracks down one California-based law firm marketer: “This is the only marketing I do — it’s the highest cost per click online. What else can you do, a young guy like me? I don’t want to do porn [sites].” According to one report via Twitter, “the Google ads are running on the WMATA Web site.” More: Maryland Daily Record (first suit filed); Eric Turkewitz. And Ron Miller, on the dilemma of the young man quoted above: “Dare I suggest this is a false choice? There has to be a third option after porn and train wreck chasing, right?”

Also: Overlawyered favorite Willie Gary is in the case.