Kevin Underhill at Lowering the Bar, a law/humor blog, has amusing live coverage (Oct. 27) of the appeal in a California court of Christoff v. Nestle USA, the $15.6 million award for using a model’s photo on a coffee label without ensuring that the proper permissions were in place (see Feb. 2, 2005).
Sid Schwab (SurgeonsBlog) on getting sued
His first: “news of the lawsuit was in the newspaper before anyone had had the decency to contact me. What kind of people act like that?” Not that everyone sympathizes: “Ho hum,” says Greedy Trial Lawyer, who read the first two posts in Schwab’s series. “Get out the violins.” Don’t miss this one, or the outpouring of reader comments (parts one, two, three)(cross-posted from Point of Law).
Wrongful birth reaches Germany
“A court ruling which ordered a gynecologist to pay child support for up to 18 years as compensation for botching a contraceptive implant was condemned by the German media as scandalous on Wednesday. The Karlsruhe-based federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that the doctor must pay his former patient, now a mother of a three-year-old boy, 600 euros ($769) a month because she became pregnant after he implanted her with a contraceptive device.” (“Doctor ordered to pay for unwanted baby”, Reuters, Nov. 15; “GYN’s “Human” Error Will Now Be Getting Child Support”, Deutsche Welle, Nov. 15). Similar: Apr. 9 (Scotland), May 9 and Jun. 8, 2000, etc.
Condo developers sued
The sudden slamming of brakes on the housing boom seems to be coinciding with a rise in litigation against condominium developers, according to the Wall Street Journal. Most peculiar-sounding lawsuit mentioned: one against a Miami developer that has canceled an unbuilt 49-floor condo tower and, it says, has refunded prospective buyers’ deposits with interest. It’s still being sued by 58 buyers demanding the profits they expected to reap had the condos been built — though the plunging South Florida real estate market makes such profits sound, um, speculative at best. Maybe they should thank the developer for canceling. (Troy McMullen, “Condo buyers take developers to court over promises”, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Nov. 11).
A greener shade of envy?
Or credit unfairly denied for an accompaniment that was better than the song itself? Saying he was instrumental in the creation of the 1967 rock classic A Whiter Shade of Pale, former Procul Harum organist Matthew Fisher has sued in British courts for a share of royalties. His lawyer “said that the 38-year delay in making a formal legal claim was because Mr Fisher was unaware of his legal entitlement.” (Lucy Bannerman, “They skipped the light fandango and are turning cartwheels in the courts”, Times Online, Nov. 14).
“Dear FTC: please adopt tougher regulations…”
Who writes to a federal agency encouraging it to adopt regulations imposing new burdens on the private sector? In at least one recent case, the public-spirited correspondent turned out to be a lawyer representing a short-seller who would profit if the enactment of new regulations caused a target company’s stock price to fall:
In one instance, a lawyer representing an investor who had shorted Pre-Paid Legal’s stock filed documents with the agency urging the rules’ adoption. Without explaining his client’s motivation, the lawyer, Hal Neier, wrote that “Pre-Paid and companies like it provide concrete examples of the very sort of practices that the proposed rule was designed to eradicate.”
The New York Times has more (Charles Duhigg, “Why Short Sellers Want to Crash the Tupperware Party”, Nov. 13).
November 14 roundup
- Plaintiffs’ lawyers and Clinton appointee damage, almost kill the entire pension system. [Point of Law] Earlier: POL Aug. 8.
- Another view of the elections on liability reform. [National Law Journal]
- Second verse, same as the first: illegitimate Wal-Mart class action (Jul. 22, 2004 and links therein) being repeated against Costco, presumably other retailers to follow. [Point of Law; Wall Street Journal]
- “I can see why, if you’re sitting in a roomful of lawyers, you might come to that conclusion. But no one outside of that room would say: ‘Hey, that’s a good idea. Let’s sue Daniel Moore.’” U of Alabama sues locally famous artist and alum for using school colors in painting famous Alabama football moments. [NYT; Lattman]
- Roundup of links as Illinois Justice Bob Thomas’s attempt to squelch public criticism goes to the jury. [Bashman]
- Silver v. Frank, Round III. [Point of Law]
- Ninth Circuit illegitimately overturns another death sentence; Supreme Court reverses for the second time. [Ayers v. Belmontes; SCOTUSblog; Daily Pundit; NY Times; WaPo]
- Chief Roberts on Nightline. [ABC News; Prawfsblawg via Bashman]
- Sam Peltzman interviewed on podcast. [Econtalk]
Will the Democrats spoil trade?
The Lou Dobbs faction in the Democratic Party seems to have grown, and the Bill Clinton faction to have shrunk, compared with six years ago, notes CoyoteBlog (Nov. 9). More: Jacob Weisberg, “The Lou Dobbs Democrats”, Slate, Nov. 8)(via Postrel); “Australian PM: US Dems Hurt Trade Reform”, AP/Houston Chronicle, Nov. 13.
Letter from a new father
Reader Greg Dwyer of Oregon sends the following:
Yours is the website I have been continuously reading the longest and the one I most identify with. So I figured I’d tell you something. I recently celebrated the birth of my first son, Michael Gabriel. And he will not go through life padded in Nerf.
He is going to play dodge ball and tag.
I will let him eat trans fats and foie gras.
He can play Grand Theft Auto when he is old enough.
He will know that medicine is a risky business that doesn’t always provide perfect cures.
He is going to be able to shoot a gun well by the time he is 21 and I will take him to get his gun license myself.
Most of all, I will teach him that life is what you make of it and if he fails at something, he will have no one to blame but himself.
Loving father and non-victicrat,
Greg Dwyer
UK: “Payout for inmates forced off heroin”
Great Britain: “The Government was accused of ‘caving in’ over drugs yesterday following the disclosure that the Home Office is about to pay out tens of thousands of pounds to prisoners because they were forced to stop taking heroin or other opiates in jail. ….The inmates, who were dependent either on heroin or the heroin substitute methadone, claimed they suffered ‘trespass’ and clinical negligence by the Prison Service in being forced to endure ‘short, sharp’ detoxification programmes resulting in ‘cold turkey’ symptoms. They were said by their lawyers to be ‘upset’ by the short time they were allowed to stay on opiate drugs while on remand or following the start of sentences.” And in case you were wondering: “The claimants’ case is being funded by taxpayers through legal aid.” (Neil Tweedie, Daily Telegraph, Nov. 13; Dominic Kennedy, “Payouts for prison drug addicts”, Times Online, Nov. 13). More: James Slack & Matthew Hickley, “Outrage after drug-addicted convicts get £700,000 compensation”, Daily Mail, Nov. 13.