Seattle: “A woman who sued a neighbor after his dog mauled her cat to death has been awarded more than $45,000. Retired teacher Paula Roemer’s 12-year-old cat, Yofi, was attacked in her back yard in February 2004 by a chow belonging to her neighbor, Wallace Gray. The dog had repeatedly escaped in the past, according to the lawsuit.” (“Woman Gets $45K for Cat Killed by Dog”, AP/Las Vegas Sun, May 9). The award included $30,000 for the personal value of the cat — tying a record for a pet, according to her lawyer — plus $15,000 for emotional distress; Ms. Roemer “was so traumatized that she began having sleep disturbances and panic attacks, sank into depression and began smoking heavily, she wrote in a sworn declaration.” (Jessica Blanchard, “Woman awarded $45,000 in cat death”, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, May 9). More coverage: Seattle Times, KOMO-TV. Meanwhile, a timely op-ed spells out why damage awards reflecting pets’ sentimental value, by scaring away veterinarians and other caretakers, could lead to needless animal deaths. (Emily Laird, “See Spot Sue”, New York Times, May 8). A similar case has been made many times in this space: see Mar. 15 (letter to the editor) and links from there.
Email boilerplate
If you ever receive email from lawyers — or from anyone who works at a law firm or in-house legal department — you’ll probably recognize some of the boilerplate formulas that Ernie the Attorney has fun with here (May 9). And: a follow-up from Ernie (May 10).
Patent Troll-Be-Gone?
Major software and hardware companies, tired of facing financial demands from companies organized for the purpose of buying up and suing over otherwise dormant patent rights, are calling for a change in patent law so that owners who are not using their patents would no longer have the right to sue for injunctions against alleged infringers (suits over damages could still be filed). Support for the idea is far from unanimous even among manufacturers, however. For more on the controversy over patent-licensing firms, see May 2, etc. (Brenda Sandburg, “A modest proposal”, The Recorder, May 9).
Clarence Stowers
Should we name him this site’s Man of the Year? Last week, after finding the freshly cut fingertip of an employee in his frozen custard at a Wilmington, N.C. dessert stand, Mr. Stowers “refus[ed] to return the evidence so it could be reattached. And now it’s too late for doctors to do anything for 23-year-old Brandon Fizer.”
Soon after Stowers found the finger in a mouthful of chocolate soft-serve he bought Sunday at Kohl’s Frozen Custard in Wilmington, he put it in his freezer at home, taking it out only occasionally to show to television cameras.
He refused to give it to the shop’s owner, and refused to give it to a doctor who was treating Fizer, who accidentally stuck his hand in a mixing machine and had his right index finger lopped off at the first knuckle.
Medical experts say an attempt to reattach a severed finger can generally be made within six hours.
But according to the shop’s management, Stowers wouldn’t give it back when he was in the store 30 minutes after the accident.
“The general manager attempted to retrieve it and rush it to the hospital,” reads a statement posted Thursday on Kohl’s Web site. “Unfortunately, the customer refused to give it to her and declared that he would be calling the TV stations and an attorney as he exited the store.”
What attorney decided to represent Mr. Stowers? Glad you asked; it’s Lee Andrews of Greensboro, N.C., who
wouldn’t say if a lawsuit against Kohl’s is planned, saying he needed “to get some more facts.”
But Andrews said his client is concerned about possible disease in the fingertip and kept it because he wanted someone to test it for “all the diseases that are out here now.”
“He’s upset to the point that he’s been debilitated to some degree,” Andrews said. “Emotionally, it’s been very upsetting to him.”
(“Fight over finger found in custard”, AP/CNN, May 6).
Mother’s Day custody special
Her kids are “too attached” to her, she was told by her soon-to-be-ex husband. Huh? Well, maybe there’s more to it than that: “His lawyer had advised him that to get what he wanted in the divorce, he would need to take a hard line on custody because that’s what mattered most to me.” (Katie Allison Granju, “Losing Custody of My Hope”, New York Times, May 8). And divorced British fathers crusade against a court system they see as stacked against them (Susan Dominus, “The Fathers’ Crusade”, New York Times Magazine, May 8).
The killer cookie
“I fully realize that there are dangers and risks to which I may be exposed by participating in Cookie Decorating” begins the waiver and release required by the University of Pittsburgh for a particular extracurricular activity. (Tip of the Overlawyered hat to J.M.)
Perhaps this explains the real motivation behind the evisceration of the raison d’être of Sesame Street’s Cookie Monster; Jonah Goldberg explores the new political correctness.
Mississippi fen-phen: “second wave of arrests”
In what an assistant U.S. Attorney said signals the start of a second wave of arrests in the Mississippi fen-phen fraud affair, Gregory P. Warren of Lafayette, La., is cooperating with authorities and is expected to plead guilty to charges arising from his role in recruiting fen-phen clients for the law firm of Schwartz & Associates in Jackson, which has not been charged. According to the AUSA’s office, Warren recruited claimants who had never in fact taken the drug; he “also is accused of failing to report on his tax return nearly $200,000 he was paid by attorneys in 2000 for recruiting Fen-Phen plaintiffs.” (Jimmie E. Gates, “More guilty pleas in Fen-Phen case”, Jackson Clarion-Ledger, May 4). For more on the scandal, see Feb. 12, Jan. 9, etc. (& letter to the editor, May 10).
Update: Gender equity and staggered sports schedules
The U.S. Supreme Court, sending a case back to the Sixth Circuit, has kept alive Michigan school athletic directors’ hopes of proving that they have a rational basis for scheduling some girls’ sports in different seasons than the equivalent boys’ sports (see Dec. 24-27, 2001; Jul. 10, 2004). (“Supreme Court ruling delays decision”, Saginaw News, May 3; Hope Yen, “High Court Asks 6th Circuit to Reconsider Girls Sports Seasons Ruling”, AP/Law.com, May 3). Mick McCabe of the Detroit Free Press says that based on actual results, the schools deserve to prevail; Michigan has one of the nation’s highest rates of participation by girls in sports and disproportionately graduates girls who win athletic scholarships in the relevant sports of volleyball and basketball. (“Gender equity no-brainer as Title IX case”, May 6).
Harvard profs vs. kid art studio
“What does a high-powered Harvard Law School professor do when he gets in a dispute with a neighbor? He sues, of course — even if that neighbor takes care of his young son after school every day.” The lawprof, for those who don’t want to follow the link, is executive-compensation-scourge Lucian Bebchuk, who’s joined with a few other Harvard-affiliated property owners to fight their neighbor, the nonprofit Agassiz Neighborhood Council, which would like to install a children’s art studio on its property. (Steve Bailey, “Sue thy neighbor”, Boston Globe, May 6).