I share my views on the Edward Whelan/Obsidian Wings/”Publius” affair at Point of Law.
Mattel fined millions for lead in toys–under pre-CPSIA law
In 2007, Mattel discovered excessive levels of lead in some of its imported Fisher Price toys. It immediately recalled millions of toys and self-reported the violation. Nevertheless, it has been hit with class action lawsuits. And if you ever had any doubt that the CPSIA was an overreaction and unnecessary to protect consumer safety, Mattel last week paid $2.3 million in fines for the violation of pre-CPSIA law. [CNNMoney via ABAJournal]
National Journal bloggers’ poll on Sotomayor
A majority of right-leaning bloggers (as well as virtually all the left-leaning) agree with me in predicting (at least on current evidence) that the Sonia Sotomayor nomination will prove more politically helpful to the Democrats than to the Republicans. The poll, also picked up in National Journal’s Ninth Justice column, quotes me as saying, “Her actual rulings don’t bear out the ‘scary radical’ meme. That Senate Dems were equally unfair to Miguel Estrada will, along with $3.26, buy you a latte at Starbucks.”
Relatedly, I can’t vouch for the methodology, which is not one that would have occurred to me, but this analysis by Corey Yung of five federal appellate circuits, based on an attempt to quantify what is meant by “activist” behavior in judges, tends to back up my sense that among judges with a liberal reputation, Obama could have found many who have shown a more adventurous disregard for precedent, less deference to other constitutional actors, etc. More: Marcia Coyle, National Law Journal.
June 7 roundup
- Pennsylvania Department of Labor launches probe on whether reality-TV show “Jon & Kate Plus 8” violates child labor laws [Pennsylvania Labor & Employment Blog, Hirsch/Workplace Law Prof via Ohio Employer’s Law]
- Dispute over termination of Navy aircraft contract called “Jarndyce v. Jarndyce of U.S. legal system” [WSJ Law Blog]
- Medical tourism, cont’d: “It appears that ‘we’re easier to sue’ is the uniquely American defense to medicine outsourcing.” [KevinMD]
- New Oklahoma law protects farmers from neighbors’ suits complaining of nuisance from farm activity [Enid, Okla., News]
- For unusually bad advice on how to save GM and Detroit, Michael Moore as usual comes through [Popehat]
- Lawyer reprimanded for telling party she should be cut up, shipped overseas [NJLJ, ABA Journal]
- Call for reform of UK laws banning press interviews of jurors after verdict [Times Online first, second articles and commentary]
- Coming soon: campaign against depiction of smoking in Raymond Chandler books, Edward Hopper paintings [CEI “Open Market”]
Wales: “School bans ‘dangerous’ swimming goggles”
“A school has banned children from wearing goggles during swimming lessons for fear they could hurt themselves.” [Telegraph (U.K.) via Cathy Gellis, who writes, “As a swimming teacher — in fact, one who doesn’t actually like her students to use goggles — I feel competent, and confident, in saying this school is insane.”]
“Crunchberries” lawsuit, cont’d
Now it’s hit the big blogs: Boing Boing, Althouse, Volokh. RiskProf picks his favorite BoingBoing comments. And at our earlier post, Hal Hewell of Hewell Law Firm, which filed the suit, writes in comments that neither the plaintiff “nor her first amended complaint stated that she believed ‘crunchberries’ was a real fruit,” and I respond.
“NYC Cops Repeatedly Ticket Parked Dead Guy”
Because, as Scott Greenfield points out, “This is NY. Death is no excuse.” [Jalopnik]
“The Lawsuit Generator that is Sacha Baron Cohen”
Beyond Borat, bringing barristers bounteous business. [WSJ Law Blog]
Mystery pink-diamond disappearance, cont’d
On Point News has an update on the defense’s motion for a new trial in the unusual federal case (with spy-thriller overtones) we covered in January. “The defense has already gotten some post-trial relief. In a May 13 order, U.S. District Judge Thomas M. Rose threw out the $2.3 million award on the criminal theft claim, leaving intact the $1.7 million for conversion and $8,400 for unjust enrichment.”
Design Piracy Prohibition Act
A bill to extend intellectual-property concepts — and litigation based on those concepts — into the world of fashion and design is pending in Congress. Kathleen Fasanella, whose Fashion Incubator site has done much to advance the CPSIA fight, warns the law will be enough to sink many small apparel and fabric firms that can’t afford lawyers to fight big firms’ infringement claims — and that it could spell an end to her own advisory/website business as well. “If CPSIA was an amputation, the Design Piracy Prohibition Act is a beheading.” A view in favor of the legislation: Counterfeit Chic. The Council of Fashion Designers of America, representing many big-name fashion design houses, has pushed for the bill, while “the largest industry group, the venerable American Apparel and Footwear Association” is opposed, predicting it will lead to “an environment of ubiquitous lawsuits between legitimate companies”.
Update: Welcome ArtFire and Etsy readers. And an update with a link to a recent critical analysis of the proposal is here.