Shi (“Carl”) Huang, a senior at Theodore Roosevelt High School in Kent, Ohio, and a Chinese national in the country on a student visa, hacked his teacher’s computer using a guessed password and obtained test questions. He was caught and given an “F” for the course, having been a straight-A student previously; the school also suspended Huang and is pressing criminal charges which could affect his ability to stay in the country. Now Huang and his parents are suing the teacher, James Zagray, the Kent board of education, and three school administrators, saying the boy was entrapped into the misconduct, that the teacher did not reach out sufficiently as he struggled with the course, and that the district mishandled the disciplinary process. Demands include monetary damages as well as changes to Huang’s grade and other records. (Marci Piltz, “Kent student sues over suspension”, Ravenna Record-Courier, May 3; Vic Gideon, “Honor student might have to leave country after getting caught cheating”, WKYC, May 2).
Basset hound ban?
“Dog breeders have warned that some of Britain’s best-loved breeds including dachshunds, bulldogs and basset hounds could disappear because of new and potentially far-reaching government animal-welfare measures.” Animal welfare groups have campaigned against the breeding of pedigreed animals, saying the pursuit of distinctive characteristics such as head size in bulldogs often comes at the expense of the animal’s health. A controversial Europe-wide treaty on animal breeding would translate the idea into law. “Dog breeders fear that the treaty’s terms are so broad that it would effectively forbid the breeding of distinctive types of dog because their defining characteristics could be seen as risking their welfare. According to the Scottish Kennel Club, ratifying the treaty would mean that anywhere between 30 and 40 breeds would effectively be outlawed.” The director of Edinburgh-based Advocates for Animals calls the argument “scaremongering nonsense”. (James Kirkup, “Euro rules ‘could outlaw 40 dog breeds'”, The Scotsman, Apr. 30).
Playground wood chips ruled unfair to disabled
Uh-oh: “A Contra Costa County school district’s use of wood chips in play boxes makes it harder for boys and girls in wheelchairs to get to swings and slides, a violation of the disabled children’s rights, a federal judge has ruled.” Rubberized mats, the main alternative, are eight times as expensive, according to a lawyer for the district in Northern California. According to playground designer Susan Goltsman, “wood chips are more yielding and may cushion falls better”, aside from which employing a variety of ground materials is helpful in keeping playgrounds interesting to kids. (Bob Egelko, “Wood chips ruled unfriendly to disabled kids”, San Francisco Chronicle, May 5).
Clients: Lerach settled our case and never told us
That’s what three clients are alleging in court papers about Bill Lerach’s $10 million settlement in 2004 of a securities case called Yusty v. Tut Systems. Carlos Horacio Yusty, Andres Jaramillo, and Rodrigo Jaramillo say that by the time they got wind of the settlement two years later, all the proceeds had been distributed and Lerach and partner Darren Robbins of Lerach Coughlin had cashed a $2.5 million fee. The trio’s lawyer, Bruce Murphy of Vero Beach, Fla., also says he was done out of a referral fee. The class-action sultan’s (and Robbins’s) response to the charges isn’t known yet. Roger Parloff of Fortune has a full report (Legal Pad, May 13).
“Publication of false information concerning the City of Pomona”
Eugene Volokh points out that you can’t be found liable for defaming a city, notwithstanding a nastygram sent by the Pomona, Calif. city attorney to the Foothill Cities weblog (May 11). The weblog has pulled down the posts in question, which reported on rumors involving the city manager and others in the city’s employ: “We’re going to let Goliath win this one”. (May 11).
“A moral pork barrel to express theatrical empathy”
“What happens in Ms. Buford’s class stays in Ms. Buford’s class”
A couple of weeks ago, we reported on two teenagers who claimed to be traumatized by seeing a gay sex book at the library. But how traumatized could they be? After all, they sued for just $20,000. So, logically, they must have only been 1/20th as distressed by the thought of gay people as Jessica Turner of Chicago:
A suit was filed on behalf of a 12-year-old girl who claims she suffered psychological distress when a teacher showed in class the gay-themed movie “Brokeback Mountain.”
The girl, Jessica Turner, and her grandparents Kenneth and LaVerne Richardson, are seeking more than $400,000 in damages under the suit filed Friday against the Chicago Board of Education and others.
[…]
The plaintiffs accuse Diaz, Buford and the Chicago Board of Education of negligence, false imprisonment and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
The suit claims Jessica continues to suffer from emotional distress caused by watching the film and is currently undergoing psychological treatment and counseling.
You know, as I recall, William Faulkner had that effect on me. I wonder what the statute of limitations is on psychological-assault-by-bad-literature.
Evolution and the legal client
We often talk about lawyers manufacturing clients in the class action context, but how about creating an entirely new class of clients? Some European activists are embarking on that path, taking their case through the European courts:
In some ways, Hiasl is like any other Viennese: He indulges a weakness for pastry, likes to paint and enjoys chilling out watching TV. But he doesn’t care for coffee, and he isn’t actually a person — at least not yet.
In a case that could set a global legal precedent for granting basic rights to apes, animal rights advocates are seeking to get the 26-year-old male chimpanzee legally declared a “person.”
Hiasl’s supporters argue he needs that status to become a legal entity that can receive donations and get a guardian to look out for his interests.
“Our main argument is that Hiasl is a person and has basic legal rights,” said Eberhart Theuer, a lawyer leading the challenge on behalf of the Association Against Animal Factories, a Vienna animal rights group.
So far, they haven’t had any luck, but they plan to appeal to higher courts, including “the European Court of Human [sic] Rights, if necessary.” The article notes that not all animal rights activists are supportive, including one “who worries that chimpanzees could gain broader rights, such as copyright protections on their photographs.”
But, surprisingly, Americans may already be ahead of them. It’s not unusual for a family fighting over an estate to fight over the family pets as vehemently as they fight over any other piece of property. But what is unusual is giving the pet a say in the matter, as in a Tennessee case decided this week:
A dogfight over Alex the Golden Retriever was resolved by agreement Monday in Probate Court.
[…]
The agreement, which was approved by Judge Karen Webster, adopted the recommendations of attorney Paul Royal, who was appointed by the court as guardian ad litem to represent Alex’s interests.
Guardians ad litem commonly are appointed to represent minor children or incapacitated adults in court proceedings, but legal observers cannot recall another local case in which one was appointed to represent a dog.
See? Lawyers will never exhaust the supply of clients, because we can always creatively come up with new sources. (And if we run out of pets, we can always adopt the idea first proposed by environmentalists in the 1970s, to allow lawyers to represent trees.)
More Chesley follies with Judge Bamberger in Kentucky?
Prominent Cincinnati attorney Stan Chesley said he wanted to file the Diocese of Covington priest-abuse case in Boone County because “we have a real friendly judge there,” a lawyer testified this week.
“He winked at me” and said “we need to file this in Boone County,” testified Covington lawyer Barbara Bonar, who is suing Chesley in a dispute over attorneys fees in the $84.5 million case.
“He said we already have hired a trial consultant, and he is real friendly with the judge,” Bonar said, describing a conversation she claimed to have had with Chesley in January 2003. “And he winked at me again.”
Chesley denies the allegations, but the fact remains that the Boone Circuit judge, Joseph Bamberger, of Kentucky fen-phen scandal fame, made an unprecedented ruling certifying a class action over priest abuse that forced the diocese into a $84.5 million settlement given that the church could not hope to defend itself against anonymous unnamed class members.
Bonar, who was briefly co-counsel for the class in the priest-abuse case, testified that Chesley’s partner Robert Steinberg told her in August 2003 that the Chesley firm had to turn down an early $3 million settlement offer from the diocese because it already had paid $400,000 in expenses to Modlin as a fee “to get the class certified.”
The diocese had sought Bamberger’s recusal. Modlin was also hired as a $2 million “trial consultant” in the fen-phen case, and went on to buy a house in Florida with Judge Bamberger. Chesley denies paying Modlin $400,000, and Bonar has her own motivation to fib, as she’s suing for a share of the Chesley fees from the class action, and claims she left the case only because of her fear of being involved in a fraud on the court. Bonar has already earned $2 million in fees out of the $4.7 million she settled for in individual cases outside the class action. Somewhere in here, a crime has been committed, whether it be bribery or perjury, but there’s work for a grand jury to be done. (Andrew Wolfson, “Lawyers clash in dispute over fees”, Louisville Courier-Journal, May 10; see also Jeanne Houck, “Claims tangle diocese lawsuit”, Kentucky Post, Nov. 26, 2003).
Update: the Kentucky Bar Association is investigating. (Paul A. Long, “Bar: Probe attorneys’ conduct”, Cincinnati Post, May 10.)
“Hello. My name is John Doe. Sue me.”
The Jersey Jihad arrests, following a report to authorities by an alert Circuit City employee, have reignited talk of protecting airline passengers from being sued for reporting suspicious behavior. Michelle Malkin has the slogan on a button (May 9; see also Audrey Hudson, “Republicans lobby Pelosi to protect ‘John Does'”, Washington Times, May 2; NRO “The Corner”). Earlier: Mar. 15, Mar. 22, Mar. 29, Apr. 19. Update: Jul. 20 (Hill conferees strip John Doe protection from bill).