Visit the vet, or else? “A cat owner who did not seek treatment for his pet’s serious ailments during the cat’s last year of life can be charged with animal cruelty, a Manhattan judge has ruled. Allegations that the defendant left a ‘swollen and bleeding’ paw and other conditions untreated ‘sufficiently demonstrate that the animal was subjected to unjustifiable physical pain,’ Criminal Court Judge ShawnDya L. Simpson wrote. The owner allegedly admitted that he had owned the cat for 15 years and never took him to the veterinarian.” (Noeleen G. Walder, New York Law Journal, Mar. 24).
The Jonathan Lee Riches docket
We’ve covered the litigious inmate fantasist before, but this is still a striking statistic: “Thirty-nine percent of the 491 cases filed so far this month in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia have been filed by one man: Jonathan Lee Riches. …Some of Riches’ prior complaints have been dismissed, including a $662 trillion suit filed in the Northern District last summer against Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick. The suit alleged that Vick was attempting to ‘kidnap’ Riches’ mind and to force him to lose weight, and demanded that the $662 trillion be delivered — in ‘British gold’ shipped via truck — to the front gates of the prison where Riches is incarcerated.” (Janet L. Conley, “Inmate’s Frequent Filings Take On Targets Ranging From Spitzer to Van Halen”, Fulton County Daily Report, Mar. 25).
NY Times on Ground Zero dust lawyer
In Sunday’s Times reporter Anthony DePalma takes a much-needed look at attorney Paul Napoli and his Napoli Bern law firm, which is now representing thousands of plaintiffs claiming injury from 9/11 dust inhalation and before that made its name in the fen-phen litigation. Among the controversies that have trailed it to the present day from that affair: charges that it divvied up settlements in a way favorable to its own fee interests, and that it used unreliable “echo mill” expert reports from echocardiologists attesting injury to fen-phen claimants. Prof. Lester Brickman, friend of this site, is quoted extensively. See our extensive earlier coverage at Overlawyered: Dec. 16, 2002, Sept. 21, 2003, etc. (echo mills); Dec. 28, 2001, Feb. 14, 2005, and Mar. 29, 2007 (settlement practices); Feb. 25, 2008 (broad net cast in 9/11 suits)(cross-posted from Point of Law).
Against victim impact statements
I’ve never liked this innovation in the criminal justice system and explain why in this comment left at Scott Greenfield’s:
What seems to me most obviously wrong in Judge Cassell’s outline [a lecture by lawprof, formerly judge, Paul Cassell, for National Crime Victims Rights Week] is his point #4, about how impact statements restore to victims “some of the dignity that was taken from them by criminal offenders”. Every day these procedures induce family members to stand up in court and read aloud “rot in hell, you’ve destroyed our family” statements which are then reported in the local press. I can’t be the only one who sees these statements as a grievous surrender of victim families’ dignity. And family members who might prefer silence as the more dignified course must often feel intense pressure to make a statement, the more demonstrative the better, for fear of appearing in others’ eyes as insufficiently loving or appreciative of the victimized member. (The figure of Cordelia comes to mind.)
I have no idea what effect victim impact statements have on the guilty person being sentenced; I think they are worth opposing because of their barbarous effect on the innocent.
Ethically failing upward in Alabama, cont’d
Updating our Jan. 6, 2007 post: “The Alabama Supreme Court has ruled that a county judge accused of ethical wrongdoing before he became a judge cannot be disciplined by the state bar until he leaves the bench. A dissenter claimed the majority opinion leads to ‘absurd consequences’ and gives the judge, Stuart DuBose, ‘unwarranted immunity.'” Voters elevated DuBose to a circuit judgeship despite his publicized role “in an estate in which he collected a $1.2 million fee for writing a client’s will without ever meeting the dying man,” to quote our earlier post. (Debra Cassens Weiss, “Facing State Bar Ethics Charges in Alabama? Become a Judge”, Mar. 20).
“Caught short, 3M will pay $700,000”
3M Co., the tape manufacturer, has agreed to pay nearly $700,000 to settle a case brought by prosecutors in Fresno County, California, charging that its Scotch and Tartan brand tapes marketed as “for one-inch use” in fact measured only .94 inch. (McClatchy/Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Mar. 27). Reader Bob Dorigo Jones writes that news of the prosecution “likely created panic within all companies that make, sell or otherwise advertise 2 x 4 boards”. Presumably, though, it would not be especially controversial for Fresno County to enforce the state’s weights and measures laws against the seller of milk or flour that was 6 percent short by weight. Does it make a difference that most users of tape don’t really care much about precise widths, inasmuch as they will not run out of tape any faster if its dimensions run slightly narrower than one inch?
For more on the affirmative-litigation activities of California counties, see this PoL post of last week.
Pennzoil v. Texaco
Via Kirkendall, Carl Icahn talks about litigating in a judicial hellhole against Joe Jamail. NSFW, but a spectacular punchline.
More on Jamail.
RIAA hasn’t paid artists
“None of the estimated $400 million that the RIAA received in settlements with Napster, KaZaA, and Bolt over allegations of copyright infringement has gone to the artists whose copyrights were allegedly infringed. Now the artists are considering suing the RIAA.” (Consumerist, Mar. 17; David Utter, WebProNews, Feb. 29).
Reader Jim Finkel writes:
Having followed the RIAA lawsuits for a while, I found this most amusing. Even though I am not a lawyer, perhaps if the funds are NOT disbursed soon, there may be a bigger fraud suit. As the RIAA has ostensibly been collecting the monies for the artists, if the RIAA does not disgorge the funds, then they have been litigating under false pretenses. If RIAA expenses are so high that they have nothing left for the artists, then the artists may have grounds to countersue the RIAA for annoying the potential customers with so many frivolous lawsuits that the record business was destroyed, by the RIAA. That might be the ultimate irony.
By the way, for suggesting this suit, I would of course request my portion of the proceeds.
Earlier coverage here.
Deep pocket files: more settlements in Great White fire
“Three more parties sued by victims of the [West Warwick, R.I.] Station nightclub fire have offered tentative settlements in the civil cases now pending in U.S. District Court.” Audio maker JBL, accused of including flammable foam in its speakers and amplifiers, is offering $815,000. “The other two parties offering to settle are ABC Bus Inc., and Superstar Services LLC, which provided bus transportation for the rock band Great White to The Station for its concert, as well as more than 25 kilograms of explosive fireworks material that the band carried on its road trip. Together they are offering $500,000.” (Tracy Breton, “3 more companies offer settlements in Station fire case”, Providence Journal, Mar. 27). Earlier: Feb. 2, etc.
“Doomsday fears spark lawsuit”
“The builders of the world’s biggest particle collider are being sued in federal court over fears that the experiment might create globe-gobbling black holes or never-before-seen strains of matter that would destroy the planet. … The Large Hadron Collider, or LHC, is due for startup later this year at CERN’s headquarters on the French-Swiss border.” Among the concerns of critics who are suing in federal court in Hawaii: “Could quarks recombine into ‘strangelets’ that would turn the whole Earth into one big lump of exotic matter?” (Alan Boyle, CosmicLog, MSNBC, Mar. 27; Dennis Overbye, “Asking a Judge to Save the World, and Maybe a Whole Lot More”, New York Times, Mar. 29).
More: Sundries Shack (“For goodness sake, one of the plaintiffs calls himself an ‘author and researcher on time travel'”); Adler @ Volokh. The liberal site Lawyers, Guns & Money, perhaps serving in this instance as a Strange Attractor, attracts a commenter who seems to agree with the lawsuit-filers that it’s better to be safe than sorry — the Precautionary Principle lives! And from our comments, links to the complaint, Ted on jurisdiction, and thoughts on the effectiveness of litigation in obtaining free publicity.