Animal rights campaigners win a victory against a hapless restaurateur in Vicenza, Italy (van Bakel, Apr. 28).
Warning label demanded: TVs subject to gravity
Following three accidents in New York City, some grieving parents are asking for legislation mandating that TV sets carry warning labels that they’re heavy and can kill or injure you if you have the bad fortune to be underneath them when they topple over. (“Children killed by falling TVs”, AP/Newsday, Apr. 30).
“Is litigation taking the ‘play’ out of kids’ playgrounds?”
This time the dateline is Portland, Ore., where the school system has removed all swing sets from elementary school playgrounds. Another casualty: tube slides. (Susan Harding, KATU, May 8). See Jul. 18, 2005, etc.
Dollar value of being sexually harassed
Well, it depends. If your employer is, say, a locally owned dry cleaner, it’s unlikely to reach more than five or six figures. If on the other hand, you work for the world’s most successful automaker, you can claim $190 million (“Toyota hit with $190M harassment suit”, Reuters/CNN, May 2). LaborProf Paul Secunda finds the number troubling (May 8). Lattman has more (May 9).
Second verse, same as the first
The votes weren’t there in the Senate for med-mal reform before, and they’re still not there. (James Rowley, ” Demos kill caps on malpractice awards”, Bloomberg/Arizona Star, May 9; Dana Milbank, “Washington Sketch: Take Two of These and Call Us Next Year”, Washington Post, May 9). See our category pages on medical malpractice and on politics.
Smiley face trademark litigation
It’s Wal-Mart versus this French guy whose lawyers go around the world claiming dibs on the use of the grinning yellow circle. Can’t they both lose? Or maybe better, both win, and obtain mutual injunctions against anyone at all employing the symbol? (Abigail Goldman, “Wal-Mart Vies for Right to Put On a Happy Face”, Los Angeles Times, May 7).
Playing chicken on railroad tracks
Kent, Wash.: A suit against Amtrak is set to go to trial next month on behalf of the survivors of a pair of 11- and 13-year-old girls who engaged in that ill-advised pastime. “The case apparently is the only one of its kind in [Washington] state where an appellate court” — that would be the Ninth Circuit — “has reversed the dismissal of a case against a train company.” (Nancy Bartley, “Lawsuit in train deaths is beating the odds”, Seattle Times, May 3).
Medical malpractice insurance forms
Orac at Respectful Insolence has a must-read post about what a change in his insurance renewal form means. No further comment needed. (Via Childs).
Blawg Review #56 at Point of Law
Ted and I join with Jim Copland, Larry Ribstein, Tom Kirkendall, and Sam Munson this morning as co-hosts of the week’s traveling carnival of law-related blogs, Blawg Review, over at Point of Law. A very few highlights:
* Ted comments on the self-unmasking of pseudonymous blogger “Juan Non-Volokh”, on various matters connected with Joe DiMaggio. and on Howard Bashman’s Stakhanovite work pace.
* Jim discusses the tax consequences for plaintiffs of confidentiality agreements in settlements, via Evan Schaeffer’s other weblog; a new way for the plaintiff’s securities bar to get around PSLRA; and a Court TV reality show set in New York City’s real-life night court.
* Larry, Tom and Sam round up posts on corporate law, on the Enron trial and other prosecutorial matters, and on a variety of subjects including law review style.
* And I discuss an on-the-job love triangle that eventuated in a Title VII lawsuit alleging sex discrimination; liability headaches for online enterprises and software manufacturers; the case in which the Cleveland bar association is trying to get a dad penalized for unauthorized practice of law after he successfully represented his own son in special-ed proceedings; Long Island legislator Jeffrey Toback’s demagogic suit against Google for allegedly interfering with children, as dissected by Eric Goldman; and the fast-rising number of cases filed under ERISA, the federal pension and employee-benefits statute.
It’s all here. Next week’s Blawg Review will be hosted by Lawyerlike.
Update: Canada high court rejects social-host liability
In a ringing reaffirmation of personal responsibility, the Supreme Court of Canada has unanimously rejected an attempt (see May 2) to hold party givers financially liable for a car crash caused by a drunken guest:
“A person who accepts an invitation to attend a private party does not park his autonomy at the door,” wrote Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin.
“The consumption of alcohol, and the assumption of the risks of impaired judgment, is in almost all cases a personal choice and an inherently personal activity.”
Unlike tavern owners, said the court, social hosts can’t monitor their guests’ drinking, may be inebriated themselves, and aren’t trained to detect whether departing guests are intoxicated.
Moreover, “the law does not impose a duty to eliminate risk.
“It accepts that competent people have the right to engage in risky activities,” said the judgment. “Conversely, it permits third parties witnessing risk to decide not become rescuers or otherwise intervene.”
(Bruce Cheadle, “Top court rejects drunk guest lawsuit”, CP/Canoe, May 5; Kathleen Harris, “”, Winnipeg Sun, May 6; opinion, Childs v. Desormeaux; Ann Marie McQueen, “Case boils down to personal responsibility”, Ottawa Sun, May 6; Michelle Mann, “Supreme Court couldn’t rule on compassion in party host case”, CBC, May 5). Numerous U.S. states have embraced social-host liability, whether through legislation or through unilateral court reinterpretation of common law doctrine.