This isn’t the first time the Tonight Show’s “Headlines” feature, in which Leno uses real-life news photos as the basis for wisecracks and ridicule, has landed the network and comedian in court. However, a defense lawyer predicts the suit will go nowhere because the audience understood the material to be comedy. (Pam Smith, “Comedian Leno Sued for ‘Sperm Donor’ Joke”, The Recorder, Apr. 12). More “Tonight Show” litigation: Dec. 7, 1999 (flying t-shirt). (Update Jul. 9: court says it will dismiss suit).
One way to deter theft
Republicans vs. political speech
Watch what you say about lawyers, cont’d
The West Virginia Trial Lawyers Association says it will file a Federal Communications Commission complaint unless radio stations yank ads from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce which compare injury lawyers to crocodiles and cite the widely circulated (but trial-lawyer-loathed) Tillinghast studies on the cost of the liability insurance system. (Jake Stump, “Trial lawyers want radio ads pulled”, Charleston Daily Mail, Apr. 6). Carolyn Elefant, Mike Cernovich and Prof. Childs comment. More watch-what-you-say-about-lawyers stories: Jan. 13, 2005, Dec. 23, 2004, and links from there.
“Hollywood Blackmail” on VH1, tonight
VH1, the cable entertainment channel known for its music videos, is running a feature news special on the problem of shakedowns and borderline-to-real extortion aimed at Hollywood celebrities. The channel interviewed me on camera to talk about some of the ways law can be used both as a remedy for shakedowns and as, itself, a weapon in the hands of the would-be shakedown practitioner. Producer Robin Edgerton tells me that several bits of the interview wound up making it into the finished program. It’s scheduled to air this evening under the title “VH1 News Presents — Hollywood Blackmail“.
Police sued over jail suicide
Illinois: “The mother of a Granville man who shot himself last year at the Spring Valley Jail has filed a wrongful death suit against the city, the police chief and a former police officer.” Robert “Steve” McFadin, placed in a holding cell after being charged with violating an order of protection against his estranged wife, wrested away the gun of former Spring Valley police officer Thomas Quartucci and beat him. When Quartucci fled the cell, McFadin used the gun to shoot himself. Quartucci, who was admitted to intensive care after the beating and remained on workers’ comp until retirement, is among the defendants in the suit, which “was filed on [Lori] Hafley’s behalf by Miskell Law Center of Ottawa and the Berkland Law Office of Marseilles. The suit alleges Quartucci violated procedure when he did not secure his loaded weapon before entering the cell. The suit also alleges actions taken by the officers at Spring Valley led to McFadin’s death.” (Erinn Deshinsky, “Mother of suicide victim sues police”, Peoria Journal-Star, Apr. 7). The suit seeks $15 million (John Thompson, “Mother sues Spring Valley, police”, La Salle News Tribune, Apr. 5; Dan Churney, “Police officers named in suicide suit”, Ottawa Times, Apr. 13).
The wages of police-misconduct suits
The city of Cincinnati has reached a $6.5 million settlement with the family of Roger Owensby Jr., who died in police custody, but the money is mostly going to … well, go ahead and guess. “If approved in federal and probate courts, the settlement would leave the family with $2.4 million and the family’s attorneys with $4.1 million.” Owensby’s father says he doesn’t mind, but not everyone regards the division of spoils in the case as benign. “Some members of City Council, which has approved the settlement, said they might not have agreed had they known lawyers would pocket more money than Owensby’s family.” (Dan Horn and Dan Klepal, “Owensby lawyers take $4.1 million”, Cincinnati Enquirer, Apr. 13). “It was originally reported that about two-thirds of the money would go to the family.” (“Most Of Roger Owensby Jr. Settlement Will Go To Attorneys”, WKRC, Apr. 12).
Update: State not liable for assault by foster-care teens
Updating our Nov. 23, 2003 item: By an 8-1 margin, the Washington Supreme Court “has swept aside an $8.3 million civil judgment against the state for the vicious beating in 1999 of a Somali refugee by a group of teenagers living in a West Seattle foster home.” The court ruled that while a state agency overseeing foster care is under a legal duty to protect children placed in care, it does not have a duty to safeguard members of the general public from the children. (Peter Lewis, “Court says state isn’t liable for crimes by foster kids”, Seattle Times, Feb. 17; decision/ concurrence/ dissent in Said Aba Sheikh v. Kevin S. Choe et al; video of oral argument on TVW).
In a December piece for the WSJ I wrote critically about the way earlier court decisions in Washington state have left the state’s taxpayers unusually exposed to damage claims over crimes that the state should allegedly have done more to prevent. The new decision may indicate (or so we can hope, anyway) that the state’s high court is increasingly aware of the downside of such wide-open liability.
“Drunk driver sues truck maker”
By reader acclaim: an FBI agent who was pulled unconscious from his burning truck with blood alcohol level of 0.306, and subsequently pleaded guilty to drunken driving, “has sued the maker of his pickup because it caught fire after he passed out behind the wheel.” The lawsuit, against General Motors and dealership Bill Heard Chevrolet, says Clymer “somehow lost consciousness” — possibly the empty bottle of Captain Morgan Rum found on the passenger seat had something to do with that? — and that while he lay there with the engine running the 2004 Chevy Silverado “somehow” began to give off smoke from some sort of combustion, which may or may not be code for “theory to be filled in later”.
At sentencing in November — he drew a suspended 30-day jail term and 48 hours community service — “Clymer’s lawyer said his client wanted to take responsibility for his actions.” (Brian Haynes, Las Vegas Review-Journal, Apr. 14).
Update: Larry Klayman and Judicial Watch
The phenomenally litigious populist-conservative figure (see Jul. 24, 2005 and Apr. 16-17, 2002) has parted ways with his old organization, Judicial Watch. Litigation has, of course, ensued (Jerry Seper, “Judicial Watch ex-head sues over ‘power grab'”, Washington Times, Apr. 14).