Peter Huber in Forbes on the lack of a mass-distributed anthrax vaccine, and a related discussion on Volokh. (Cross-posted at Point of Law.)
Check it out: new ShopThisBlog.com bookstore
Longtime readers of this site will remember our affiliated Amazon bookstore, which we maintained for a few years but gradually stopped updating as other duties seemed more pressing (you can still find it near the bottom of our ever-handy “General Links” page). Recently I was approached by the founder of a clever new service, ShopThisBlog.com, which comes up with customized bookstores keyed to popular blogs (based on books the bloggers have mentioned or reviewed, or which are closely related, etc.) ShopThisBlog.com then divides the resulting Amazon affiliate revenue with cooperating bloggers. It did not take long for me to realize that the bookstore ShopThisBlog had devised for Overlawyered was far better designed and more useful than the one I’d done on my own, and had thoughtfully been updated with newer books I’ve mentioned favorably in my writing.
So you’ll notice a box in the right-hand column of the front page which showcases ShopThisBlog recommendations. (I expect to tinker further with its presentation as we go along.) By all means check it out, check out the parallel shops keyed to other sites, and if you’re a blogger with reasonable traffic consider checking out the possibility of getting a ShopThisBlog bookstore of your own.
UK: False rape accusations
If the charges of rape turn out to be bogus — worse yet, if they have led to the locking up of an innocent defendant later exonerated — should the accuser still enjoy the privilege of press anonymity? The case of Warren Blackwell, jailed for three years for a crime he never committed, vs. “Miss A”. (Carol Sarler, “Do fake rape victims have a right to anonymity?”, Daily Mail (U.K.), Sept. 13; Michael Horsnell, “Man jailed over sex attack clears his name”, The Times (U.K.), Sept. 13). More: accuser’s name is disclosed, prompting further controversy (Strange Justice, Oct. 23).
Senate spotlight: Chafee-Whitehouse (R.I.)
As if trial lawyers didn’t already have enough good friends in the U.S. Senate, Democratic challenger and former state attorney general Sheldon Whitehouse is making a strong bid to unseat incumbent Lincoln Chafee for a Senate seat from Rhode Island. (Jim Baron, “Poll: Senate race even; Gov. surges”, Pawtucket (R.I.) Times, Oct. 3; “Democrats bet on former attorney general to take back Senate seat”, AP/WPRI, Sept. 14). Of the fifty state attorneys general, Whitehouse was the only one willing to sign up for the Motley Rice law firm’s crusade to attach retroactive liability to former makers of lead paint and pigment; see Jun. 7, 2001, Oct. 30-31, 2002, Mar. 5-7, 2003, Feb. 23, 2006, etc. For more on Whitehouse’s enthusiasm for such creative litigation, see Oct. 26, 1999 (latex gloves).
$217M stroke verdict on the radio
Some time after 1PM Eastern, I’ll be on “The Buzz” on WBAL-1090-AM (Baltimore), discussing the $217M stroke verdict (covered Oct. 5 and Oct. 7).
Update: Well, I was told we were going to be talking about the stroke verdict, but the host wanted to argue about the McDonald’s coffee case instead. Chip Franklin could not be dissuaded from the idea that coffee “should not” cause third-degree burns, and that McDonald’s must have done something wrong, but courts note that even coffee served below the optimum temperature are capable of such burns.
Florida reform in trouble?: Jeff Kottkamp
Florida has staggered towards reform in the last few years under Governor Jeb Bush, bush GOP candidate Charlie Crist’s running mate, Jeff Kottkamp, is a trial lawyer, reform opponent, and plaintiff in a ludicrous suit blaming a hospital construction contractor for medical complications he had following heart surgery. (John Kennedy, “GOP candidate breaks rank on tort reform”, Sun-Sentinel, Oct. 5) (via Childs). Earlier coverage: Sep. 18 and links therein.
Elsewhere in Florida, the Florida Supreme Court has essentially undone a 2004 reform voters passed in a referendum (Nov. 3, Mar. 1: it will allow attorneys to avoid the effect of a constitutional amendment capping medical malpractice attorneys’ fees, so long as their clients sign a waiver saying they’re willing to pay more. (Aaron Deslatte, “Court lets lawyers bypass lawsuit cap”, Tallahassee Democrat, Sep. 29). I actually applaud this step to the free market, but just wish doctors had the same rights to get their patients to sign waivers. Apparently courts and consumer advocates are willing to trust only lawyers with the freedom of contract or speech.
“Illegal immigrants sue Wendy’s”
“A group of illegal immigrants who worked for Wendy’s International Inc. is suing the restaurant chain because the company fired them after discovering it had missed a deadline for joining a federal program that would have helped them attain legal status.” (Rasha Madkour, AP/Houston Chronicle, Oct. 6).
More: the restaurant company blames a series of “mistakes made by others” that began before it bought the Cafe Express chain. In particular, Houston-based business law firm Boyar & Miller failed to take steps needed to enroll workers in the program. Commenter David Schwartz points out:
It might be worth noting that the employees *paid* to partipicate in the program. Surely if I pay my employer for legal services and I don’t get them, either my employer or their law firm is at fault, no?
Isn’t missing a filing deadline a classic example of attorney malpractice?
Update: Blaming banks for terrorist attacks
U.S. District Judge Charles P. Sifton in Brooklyn has denied motions to dismiss lawsuits which seek to blame Credit Lyonnais of France and National Westminster Bank of the United Kingdom for terrorist bombings in Israel linked to Hamas; the banks handled funds for charities which channeled funds to Hamas. Credit Lyonnais “[vainly] cited investigations in France that cleared the group of any wrongdoing.” (“U.S. judge refuses to dismiss terror finance suit vs French bank”, AP/International Herald Tribune, Oct. 5). Ted covered the lawsuits on Jan. 6 and Feb. 24 of this year.
More on the Allan Navarro $217M verdict
Kevin MD reviews the medicine behind the Navarro stroke case (which we covered Oct 5/6), and finds a lot of 20/20 hindsight second-guessing. One commenter adds:
The scary thing to me and many ER physicans about cases like this is that outside of the diploplia I probably see 3-4 patients like this a week and usually send them home with or without a Head CT. When we read cases like this we thing “Thank God it wasn’t me” and realize these cases are bound to eventually happen to us too. I see 3-4 patients an hour I CANNOT decrease that to 0.5-1.0 patient an hour and get a specialty consult on every single patient.
Once again, a verdict that deters practice, rather than malpractice.
(Update, August 2007: case settles.)
Jackpot justice: $20M for $25,000 insurance claim
Ted Fields was injured in an auto accident with Jimmy Woodley; Woodley’s insurer went bankrupt, so Fields, on January 30, 1997, asked Allstate to pay $25,000 in medical bills and lost wages. Allstate sent Fields forms to fill out, and he did so three weeks later; when Allstate didn’t pay instantaneously, he sued them in March 1997 for bad faith. Fields turned the discovery process into a far-reaching investigation of all of Allstate’s claim procedures; the judge refused to constrain irrelevant deposition questioning, at which point in 1999 Allstate offered Fields the full amount of his $50,000 policy limit rather than waste hundreds of thousands in trial. Fields refused; his attorneys filed several separate motions of default rather than litigate the underlying issues after the trial court denied a summary judgment motion. An appellate court found that Allstate was entitled to summary judgment because of the lack of any evidence of bad-faith in responding to Fields’s claims; the Indiana Supreme Court overturned that ruling on a procedural technicality that the appeal was premature.
The trial court ruled that Allstate was not allowed to present evidence that it was not liable for actual or punitive damages or that it acted “with anything other than dishonest purpose, moral obliquity, furtive design, and/or ill will.” A jury, hearing this one-sided sham of a trial, awarded $20 million in damages, though one would hope the Court of Appeals, hearing a timely appeal, makes the same decision it made before. Press coverage fails to mention that Allstate wasn’t allowed to defend itself at trial; the plaintiff told the jury that the dispute caused high blood pressure, heart problems, and a stroke, though then the question becomes why he isn’t suing his attorney. (Ken Kosky, “Valpo man wins $20 million verdict v. Allstate”, Northwest Indiana Times, Oct. 6).