If you ignore that fact that I’m included, it’s an impressive list, as is the Lawyers for McCain Steering Committee. If you’re a law professor interested in joining the list, do drop me a line.
I should further disclose that I am doing some pretty exciting (if unpaid) consulting for the campaign; as it will require some travel, blogging will be light from me for the next few days.
And you thought you had a tough day at work.
Apparently, that pales in comparison to the day that one undercover cop had from Texas. His job was so rough, he claims that he had to have sex with a prostitute during a sting operation. Unfortunately for him, his superiors didn’t think it was required. After being suspended, he’s brought suit challenging his discipline. At trial, here is his, ahem, money quote: “If you are asking if I had an orgasm, yes. It was a job, sir,” the cop said. “I didn’t have pleasure doing this. I was paid to do it.” (Beaumont Enterprise, 8/21)
What would Andre the Giant have thought about a new lawsuit just removed to federal court on Friday? Three wrestlers, Scott Levy (better known as Raven), Christopher Klucsarits (known as Chris Kanyon) and Michael Sanders (“Above Average” Mike Sanders), have brought a class-action lawsuit against the Connecticut-based World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. company alleging that they have been misclassified as “independent contractors” instead of employees. They are seeking unspecified “financial benefits” that would have come with being an employee. WWE has denied the claims in a 10-Q filing but has not filed a formal response yet. Of course, Overlawyered has chronicled lawsuits like this before — previous a group of strippers also claimed that they were not independent contractors. (You can read more about the claims and download the lawsuit directly at my site here.)
Ever wonder who that “Schwartz” is listed under the “Other Law Blogs” links on the right of this page is? (Go ahead and check, I’ll wait.)
Well, it’s none other than me, Dan Schwartz, your guest blogger for the week. I’m honored to be guest-blogging here for the week — nearly one year after I started my very own Connecticut Employment Law Blog. When I’m not blogging, I’m a lawyer for Pullman & Comley, a terrific medium-sized firm that represents lots of businesses in Connecticut and beyond. I’m a mere cub next to Overlawyered’s grizzled vets, but I’ll try to keep up with the pace this week.
So what do I blog about? Well, the blog’s title is that obvious, but it’s a little more than that too. Crazy laws and strange cases are always ripe for discussion, but so does the item that passes beneath the radar. Too often, employment cases are given short shrift with important details left out. Litigation is much more complex than just winners and losers and sometimes the “loser” of the case may actually be the “winner” if they’ve done better than a settlement demand, for instance.
What’s on the agenda this week? You’ll just have to check back. But keep forwarding those tips, suggestions and feedback. And my sincere thanks to Walter and the Overlawyered team for the opportunity.
Does class actioneer Stephen Tillery really want to call renewed public attention to his settlement with Sears, in which the settling lawyers made out so well ($17 million) given the somewhat elusive benefits to the class of consumers? (Madison County Record, Jul. 30, and editorial, Aug. 2). Our earlier coverage of the case appeared Jan. 31.
I’m on the panel of bloggers polled by National Journal in its “Convention Daily” feature. Other familiar names include Betsy Newmark of Betsy’s Page, Patrick Frey of Patterico, and Jonathan Adler of Volokh Conspiracy. It’s a secret ballot, so I’m not going to say how I voted.
Also, thanks to the U.K.’s The Lawyer for their kind words on our recent ninth anniversary (Jul. 7); they describe us as the “grand old dame presiding over the world of legal blogs”, which I’m afraid tends to conjure up Dame Edna. And a blog item by Ed Mendel at the San Diego Union-Tribune (Jun. 26) gave a mention to our brief Bill Lerach rebuttal item in Portfolio, for which thanks too.
A couple of other mentions in recent months: Jane Daniel quoted me in Publisher’s Weekly in an article on litigation against small publishers (“So (Don’t) Sue Me: A small press faces the wrath of an unhappy author”, May 12). And Keithius of CoreDump writes (Jul. 21) that he is “reading Overlawyered again. I stopped reading for a while because it just depressed me.” Let’s all try to cheer him up.
The group radiates an intransigent, “there is no permissible debate” attitude on its subject, and “there is no politician who has the audacity” to call its bluff (“Let’s chuck the drinking age”, Denver Post, Aug. 21)(via Protein Wisdom). Earlier on the so-called Amethyst Initiative (to reconsider the 21 year old age limit) here, with many reader comments.
More: Steve Chapman, with whom it is rare for us to disagree, takes the opposite view (syndicated/Washington Times, Aug. 24).
The Delaware senator tapped as Obama’s running mate has just announced that he’s giving away to charity campaign contributions from participants in the Scruggs scandal, no doubt preparing for scrutiny of a set of connections that have already gotten considerable attention in the blogosphere [ABA Journal, NMC @ Folo, YallPolitics, Lattman @ WSJ law blog, Rossmiller, our own mention]. Lotus @ Folo wonders if the McCain camp will risk bringing up Scruggsiana given their own candidate’s former dealings with the disgraced lawyer.
In 2005, Sen. Biden praised “bottom-feeders” (his term) in the legal profession, saying it was worth it to let them collect big fees “to stop bad guys from doing bad things”. In another account, the Senator “began pounding the table in opposition to the bill [Class Action Fairness Act] as he praised plaintiffs attorneys”. On Sen. Biden’s overall alignment with the general trial lawyer cause, see our earlier links here, here, and here.
Members of Biden’s family, including brother Jim Biden and son Joseph (“Beau”) Biden III, who serves as Delaware attorney general, have figured in many news stories about the senator’s connections with the practicing law world. The state of Delaware, renowned for the high caliber of its legal system, has lately attracted an influx of asbestos lawsuits filed on behalf of residents of other states, a trend criticized by guestblogger Steven Hantler (of the Chrysler Corporation) last year. Credit-card companies are a mainstay of the Delaware economy, and Marc Ambinder notes Biden’s having “pushed the bankruptcy bill that Dems now hate”.
Orin Kerr @ Volokh, who is from Delaware himself, likes the Senator.
More: Carter Wood @ PoL on the Senator’s rating of “zero” on legal reform as judged by NAM. See also Ted’s further post. Open Secrets covers the Senator’s campaign finance. And now, as Lotus @ Folo notes, the AP’s Pete Yost and Holbrook Mohr have jumped on the Mississippi connection.
Two years ago guestblogger Hans Bader wrote about the constitutional challenge to the new law’s establishment of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. By a 2-1 margin, with Judge Brett Kavanaugh penning an extensive dissent, a panel of the D.C. Circuit yesterday rebuffed the challenge. (Wood @ Point of Law; Adler @ Volokh; Bader @ CEI Open Market).