- “I’m lovin’ it: McDonald’s settles joint employer case with NLRB” [Jon Hyman] Will NLRB junk its joint employer doctrine once and for all? [Scott Shackford, Reason, in December] String of welcome NLRB rulings on other topics in late 2017 [Sharon Block, On Labor, who should not be held responsible for my evaluation of the decisions as welcome] More: Connor Wolf, Inside Sources;
- Union opt-out window at U.S. Dept. of Education will be open more than one 48-hour period per year [Frederick Hess and Grant Addison, AEI] Spot the logical flaw: claim that Janus and Masterpiece Cakeshop cases could combine to create new First Amendment right for public school teachers to strike [Andrew Strom, On Labor]
- Eighth Circuit: federal labor law doesn’t protect workers against firing over IWW flyer-posting campaign falsely claiming restaurant’s food is unsafe
[Daniel Pasternak, Employment Law Worldview; earlier here and here on Jimmy John’s/MikLin dispute] - Mark Pulliam remembers a giant of labor law, Prof. Sylvester Petro [Misrule of Law]
- In Britain, Royal Mail cooperates with some of its union locals after they vote not to deliver Mr. Murdoch’s Sun paper to homes [Adam Withnall, Independent]
- One libertarian economist’s view of right to work laws [David R. Henderson] Municipal home rule ventures into labor regulation can work both ways: “Local Right-to-Work Case Has National Implications” [Connor Wolf, Inside Sources on Lincolnshire, Ill. RTW ordinance before Seventh Circuit]
Campus puritanism, cont’d
If the WSJ paywall kept you from reading my piece last month on Yale admissions and social justice, an unpaywalled version is now up courtesy of the Cato Institute.
Related: “Then, he asked me what my ‘exit plan’ was. He explained that there were certain safe ways to exit the building.” Later: “‘A student shouted out “F–k the law.” This comment stunned me. I replied, “F–k the law? That’s a very odd thing. You are all in law school.”‘” Josh Blackman speaks at CUNY Law School, the city-sponsored law school dedicated to one particular and controversial ideology, that of “public interest law.” [Blackman’s blog post; Robby Soave, Reason; William Jacobson, Legal Insurrection; Eugene Volokh (“seems like an organized attempt to keep Blackman from speaking…The protesters’ standing on the same stage as the speaker, I think, would also not be tolerated for other events”); Eric Turkewitz (“Is their training so shoddy that they don’t grasp there are differences of opinion on how a law or the constitution is read?…Why are they afraid of words?”)]
Also related: Keith Whittington of Princeton speaks at Cato on his new book, “Speak Freely: Why Universities Must Defend Free Speech” [Ilya Somin, Jonathan Adler]
The man who exposed the shoddy forensics of Shaken Baby Syndrome — and got prosecuted
John Plunkett, who just died at age 70, was a Minnesota medical examiner who grew skeptical of the forensic theory behind Shaken Baby Syndrome.
He started investigating cases in which children had died in a manner similar to the way accused caregivers had described the deaths of the children they were watching — by short-distance falls. What he found alarmed him. In 2001, Plunkett published a study detailing how he had found symptoms similar to those in the SBS diagnosis in children who had fallen off playground equipment. It was a landmark study. If a short-distance fall could produce symptoms similar to those in SBS cases, the SBS diagnosis that said symptoms could only come from shaking was wrong. By that point, hundreds of people had been convicted based on SBS testimony from medical experts. Some of them were undoubtedly guilty. But if Plunkett was right, some of them almost certainly weren’t.
After he gave expert testimony that led to an acquittal in Oregon and thus became “a threat to SBS cases all over the country,” the county district attorney indicted Plunkett over supposed inconsistencies in his testimony. Those proceedings eventuated in the dropping of some charges and Plunkett’s acquittal on the rest; in the mean time, however, they chilled the willingness of defense attorneys elsewhere to rely on his testimony. [Radley Balko]
Prop 65’s well-oiled lawyer/activist machine
I’m quoted at length in a piece on why California’s Proposition 65, despite public scorn and outrage over cases like the latest on coffee warnings, is so hard to reform.
“The bias is toward listing chemicals just to be cautious even though they probably are not harmful, counting ‘exposures’ such as poker chips and doorknobs that are unlikely to touched in such a way as to transfer relevant amounts of chemicals to the human body, and concentrations that are almost certainly harmless under likeliest-case rather than worst-case scenarios,” Olson said.
The senior fellow said people will nod in agreement when asked if they should be warned of risks to health.
“But every time I start my car and drive it onto the street I create a risk of hitting you as a pedestrian,” Olson said. “Do you have a right to be warned of that risk? Each time, or only once?”
He added the balance of scientific opinion these days leans toward the view that moderate coffee drinking probably provides overall health benefits and maybe even net anti-cancer benefits.
“The idea of putting a cancer warning on such a product is not merely irrelevant to public health goals, but actively in conflict with them,” Olson said.
Much more at the link [Angela Underwood, Northern California Record] And more on the coffee case as well as Prop 65 generally.
The FBI and S.D.N.Y. raid a lawyer’s office
On the legalities of the raid on Trump’s attorney Michael Cohen, a good place to start is with Ken White’s for the New York Times (his earlier blog post). Also: “Lawyers should be reminding people, pundits and groundlings alike, that this is an extreme measure, a dangerous measure, that may be necessary” but should not be the occasion of glee [Scott Greenfield]
Meanwhile, the New York Times has managed to discover the worst argument.
April 11 roundup
- For best effect, read it aloud: “Do YOU appear in the form of water droplets? Are YOU found on grass and windows in the morning? If so you MAY be dew condensation.” [Andy Ryan]
- “Bezos could get out of Trump’s kitchen by telling the editors and reporters at his newspaper to shut up about the President.” [John Samples]
- Wave of ADA web-accessibility suits hit banks: “N.Y. lawyers sue 40-plus companies on behalf of blind man in a month” [Justin Stoltzfus, Legal NewsLine] More: Jonathan Berr, CBS MoneyWatch;
- “Law schools should not continue hiring faculty with little to no practical experience, little to no record of scholarship, and little to no teaching experience. ” [Allen Mendenhall, Law and Liberty]
- U.K.: “Couple claiming compensation for food poisoning exposed by holiday selfies” [Zoe Drewett, Metro]
- Federal judge: “every indication” that prominent Philadelphia personal injury firm “essentially rented out its name in exchange for referral fees” [ABA Journal]
Compliance: your bright future awaits
From Caleb Johnson on Instagram: “Your path to becoming a Chief Compliance Officer, apply now for Fall admission.”
Police roundup
- BBC on Baltimore police gun trace task force scandal [Jessica Lussenhop] Didn’t even bother using the real kind: “Baltimore Cops Carried Toy Guns to Plant on People They Shot, Trial Reveals” [Drew Schwartz, Vice]
- Kentucky state police to media: do not put anything out about our investigations on social media “until OUR (KSP) press release is sent out.” Really? [Scott Greenfield]
- “In unmarked cars, Orlando, Fla. officers box in car whose occupants are suspected of not wearing seatbelts; the driver drives off; the police catch up, ram the car, and shoot the driver dead. Allegation: Contrary to the officers’ testimony, the driver wasn’t about to run over an officer when he was killed; he couldn’t have, as the car’s engine had died after police rammed the vehicle. Eleventh Circuit: Qualified immunity. (H/t: Police4aqi.)” [John K. Ross, “Short Circuit”]
- Police unionization may increase misconduct: “Our primary result is that collective bargaining rights lead to about a 27% increase in complaints of officer misconduct for the typical sheriff’s office.” [Dhammika Dharmapala, Richard H. McAdams, and John Rappaport via Jonathan Adler]
- Dept. will publish accounts of misconduct investigations, but with names of officers omitted: “NYPD Argues They Simply Can’t Be More Transparent About Its Violent Cops” [Molly Osberg, Splinter News]
- Michigan: “Seven Current and Former Police Officers Charged with 101 Felony Counts related to Fraudulent Auto Inspections”
[Attorney General Bill Schuette]
“Ligonier woman’s lawsuit blames Trump House for pre-election wreck”
Pennsylvania: “A Ligonier woman claims a car crash less than two weeks before the 2016 presidential election was caused by the likeness of Donald Trump.” Trump House, a residence painted by its owner in flag colors and bearing a 12-foot-high cutout likeness of the 45th President, has become a local attraction and the lawsuit says another driver was distracted by it and struck the plaintiff’s Honda Civic. Plaintiff Kellie Roadman “claims property owner Leslie Baum Rossi was negligent for failing to properly mark the driveway and not receiving a permit from PennDOT…. The driver of the second car was not named as a defendant in the lawsuit.” [Rich Chodolofsky, PennLive]
Liability roundup
- In “race to the courthouse,” lawyers urge Texas counties to sue over opioids [Marissa Evans, Texas Tribune] “Leading Pain Doctors Face Scores of Opioid Lawsuits” [Roger Parloff, who edits newly launched nonprofit site Opioid Watch] “Opioid Settlement Talks Hit Headwinds” [Sara Randazzo, WSJ] A professor (and friend) recently treated for cancer doesn’t care for the “just throttle the supply of prescription opioids” answer [Steven Horwitz, USA Today]
- Asbestos bankruptcy trusts are poorly defended against fraudulent claims. What happens if they run out of money? [U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform study and release] Three senators introduce bill aimed at providing oversight of the bankruptcy trusts [Sen. Chuck Grassley] Have asbestos filings finally peaked? [Amanda Bronstad, National Law Journal] “Cleaning Up The Asbestos Litigation Mess: A Role For The Department Of Justice?” [Glenn Lammi, WLF/Forbes]
- Trial lawyers yearn to knock down validity of contractually agreed arbitration so that every dispute can go to litigation. Is this their year? [L.M. Sixel, Houston Chronicle]
- Judge turns back class action against Home Depot over size of 4x4s, other lumber [Scott Holland, Cook County Record; Jonathan Stempel, Reuters (can be refiled), earlier here and here]
- “The Impact of Lawsuit Abuse on American Small Businesses and Job Creators,” November testimony by John Beisner before Senate Judiciary Committee;
- “Civil Justice Update – Wisconsin Governor Walker Signs Into Law New Reforms” [Andrew C. Cook, Federalist Society] More on disclosure of litigation finance arrangements [Kevin LaCroix]