Suspended NFL players file disabled-rights claims

Middle linebacker Odell Thurman of the Cincinnati Bengals and Tampa Bay Bucs cornerback Torrie Cox, both suspended for repeat violations of the National Football League’s substance abuse policy, filed complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleging discrimination on the basis of being regarded as disabled, with alcoholism being the disability. The Americans with Disabilities Act has been construed to prohibit discrimination against rehabilitated alcoholics, but not to protect current substance abuse. However, the line distinguishing behavior regarded as current from that regarded as past can be hazy. (Len Pasquarelli, “Bengals’ Thurman, Bucs’ Cox file discrimination claims against NFL”, ESPN.com, Aug. 17). Paul Secunda discusses at Workplace Law Prof (Aug. 23).

Intern for the AEI Legal Center for the Public Interest

Are you an Overlawyered reader and a student in the greater Washington DC area? Do you have any interest in interning for the new AEI Legal Center for the Public Interest? We’re looking for someone to put in 15-20 hours a week on administrative matters, but working at AEI (one of Washingtonian magazine’s fifty-five great places to work in DC) also gives one the opportunity to attend amazing public-policy conferences and do some writing as well if one is inclined.

Apply through the AEI website.

Fans sue relocating sports teams

“Two Sonics and Storm season-ticket holders plan to file a lawsuit today, accusing the new team owners of defrauding ticket buyers who believed assurances that they intended to keep the teams in Seattle.” The franchises have announced plans to move to Oklahoma City, but some fans say it won’t be as much fun to watch them in the mean time knowing they’re destined to leave. Seattle personal injury lawyer Michael Myers is representing Carolyn Bechtel and Patrick Sheehy in the suit, which was arranged by Save Our Sonics and Storm, a local group trying to block the move. (Jim Brunner, Seattle Times, Oct. 1). Separately, Seattle city officials have sued on different grounds: “The city wants a court order forcing the team to play out its lease at KeyArena through September 2010 instead of paying a cash settlement to leave early.” Owners say the team lost $17 million playing in Seattle last year. (“Blame flies as city sues Sonics”, Sept. 25).

Watch what you say about lawyers dept.: Amiel Cueto

A month ago St. Louis Post-Dispatch columnist Bill McClellan wrote a less-than-respectful column reporting on the course of a controversial defamation suit filed by disbarred local attorney Amiel Cueto. Now Cueto has notified McClellan that he regards him as having acted as an “agent” of the defendant in the suit, the Madison-St. Clair Record, and he’s threatening him with compulsory process as a witness. McClellan, whom Overlawyered readers will remember as having been the target of appalling legal bullying from Metro-East plaintiff’s lawyers in the past, retains his cheerful tone in a new column. (Bill McClellan, “Amiel Cueto has a gift, or maybe he doesn’t”, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Aug. 31; “Accusations, lawsuit make me nostalgic”, Sept. 30).

The underlying action arose from an item that ran in the U.S. Chamber-supported Madison-St. Clair Record on Jan. 30, 2006, alleging that Cueto, who served six years in prison on an obstruction of justice conviction, had been spied at a meeting of St. Clair County judges. “Once one of the most powerful lawyers in Southern Illinois, Cueto was said to have ‘owned’ fifteen of St. Clair County’s seventeen judges in the mid-1990s,” the column further asserted. Cueto sued the paper, in a hard-fought action currently in process. In other actions, as Ted noted Feb. 26, Cueto has sued the Illinois Civil Justice League and its political action committee over a campaign ad, and a local resident over a letter to the editor in the Belleville, Ill. News-Democrat (Malcolm Gay, “Power Broken”, Riverfront Times, Sept. 5; Ann Knef, “Amiel Cueto takes aim at ICJL”, Madison-St. Clair Record, Feb. 20; ICJL, Dec. 4, 2006).

Canada: class action plaintiff’s lawyers on the hook?

Canada has moved toward more liberal allowance of class-action litigation in recent years; it has also, like most non-U.S. countries, chosen to retain its historic principle of “loser-pays”, or “costs follow the event”, fee shifting. What happens when prevailing defendants seek an award of costs against losing class plaintiffs, assuming that the individual class members cannot be reached for the purposes of assessing costs? In a bitterly fought lawsuit over unclaimed veterans’ pension accounts, the federal government in Ottawa went after three class lawyers for C$4 million in costs out of their own pockets. The Ontario Court of Appeal denied its petition, but the lawyers say they feel chilled from organizing more such suits. In all, the federal government spent an estimated C$6 million in legal fees and C$10 million in other costs successfully defending the pension suit. (Randy Richmond, “Ottawa claimed denying justice”, London Free Press, Sept. 20). Earlier London Free Press reports by Randy Richmond on underlying lawsuit: “One Last Battle: Dark Politics”, Oct. 30, 2006; “An ugly fight for veterans’ benefits”, Oct. 31.

Facebook and the law

What if any are the legal issues raised by employers’ use of Facebook and similar social networking sites to check out job applicants? (George Lenard, CollegeRecruiter.com blog, Sept. 1; via Between Lawyers). What about prosecutors who decide to use it to gather incriminating evidence? (Arbitrary and Capricious, Sept. 16, via Legal Blog Watch).

Speaking of Facebook, Overlawyered’s own recently launched group there is now up to 171 members, but that’s way short of the number that would cause Ted to empty his wallet for charity as promised, and there’s only 24 hours or so to go on his offer. Anyone for a last-minute surge?

Apple sued for dropping iPhone price

Queens, N.Y. resident Dongmei Li has sued the tech giant, along with AT&T and Steve Jobs, over the $200 slash in the price of the much-ballyhooed cellphone less than two months after its launch. Among her many claims are that Apple unfairly deprived her of the chance to sell her early-bought iPhone at a profit, and that the $100 store credit Apple offered early buyers was inferior to the full refund they could have obtained if they decided they didn’t like the product right away. (Kasper Jade, “Apple, Jobs, AT&T sued over iPhone price cut, rebates”, AppleInsider, Sept. 28; Tom Krazit, “One More Thing”, CNet, Sept. 28; more comments at TechMeme; Katherine Mangu-Ward, “When Bad PR Happens to Good Economics”, Reason, Sept. 14). At the Apple Insider Forums, commenter Ken Laws quotes a passage describing another part of the suit:

The lawsuit goes on to accuse Apple, Jobs and AT&T of forcing customers into 2-year service agreements with AT&T and imposing hefty $175 termination fees.

I’ll never forget that terrifying night. I was just sitting at home, minding my own business, when Steve Jobs and a platoon of AT&T thugs burst through my front door…. Hovering helicopters and troops with vicious, snarling dogs kept the damned in line as we waited, huddled in fear, knowing our only choices were to sign the two year contract or be put up against the back wall of the Apple Store and shot.

I survived that night. But I know a lot of people who didn’t. I see their faces whenever I get a call on my iPhone, because I screwed up my contacts list and all the portraits are wrong.

Earlier iPhone suits: Jul. 30, Sept. 25, and (trademark claim): Jan. 10.