We discussed the foul-ball-injury litigation on Feb. 6; the appellate court affirmed on Mar. 29 (via Bashman). Pakett had also sued the architectural firm that designed the ballpark.
Johnnie L. Cochran Jr., Dead at 67
Cochran is most famous for, with the help of a passive Judge Ito, gulling a jury into acquitting double-murderer O.J. Simpson, but he was in a number of other notable cases: for example, as a young deputy city attorney, he unsuccessfully prosecuted Lenny Bruce for obscenity in 1964. Cochran was already a prominent Los Angeles attorney when he joined the nightmarish “Dream Team,” and then parlayed his national fame into a successful personal injury business while continuing to play the celebrity trial game. To his partial credit, whenever asked if he thought Simpson was innocent, he carefully couched his reply to dodge the question by noting that Simpson always maintained his innocence. (Adam Liptak, NY Times, Mar. 30).
A confession: though Cochran wouldn’t have known me from Adam, someone digging through the LA Superior Court files might find a case where he and I were both on the caption page as co-counsel. I disagree with many of Cochran’s outside causes, and disagree with many of the results he achieved, but his skills were unquestionable–he was by far the most charismatic man I’d ever met, even when he was wearing a suit in a shade of yellow no other person I know could’ve gotten away with.
I’m not inclined to criticize him today. Cochran took advantage of flaws in the system on behalf of his or her clients, and did that about as well as any other trial lawyer of his era. Blame–and fix–the system, not the man for whom the system provides the economic incentive to act against society’s best interests.
Walter’s Overlawyered entries on Cochran: Dec. 6; Apr. 29; Apr. 15; Aug. 29, 2003 (and links therein); pre-2003. (& letter to the editor, Jun. 8).
U.K.: “Safe for 72 years, now Cake Walk must close”
“Health and safety officers have closed Britain’s last ‘moving staircase’ fairground attraction, even though the ride has operated in complete safety for the past 72 years.” The owner of the former Butlin’s camp at Felixstowe says he believes the cakewalk, which has been running since 1933, is the last one left in Britain; “inspectors from the Health and Safety Executive have ruled that it must be closed because it no longer meets modern safety standards.” (David Sapsted, Daily Telegraph, Mar. 26; “Health and safety takes the cake”, Suffolk Evening Star, Mar. 25).
Bible ploy backfires
25-year-old Rhonda Maloney’s car was stuck in the snow early one February morning. Robert Harlan stopped, but not to help: he admittedly raped Maloney. Maloney escaped Harlan’s vehicle and flagged down a passing motorist, Jaquie Creazzo. Harlan responded to Creazzo’s rescue attempt by chasing after her, shooting her three times just outside the Thornton, Colorado police station, paralyzing her in the process. Harlan escaped; Maloney’s body, beaten and shot, was found seven days later. DNA and fingerprint evidence led to Harlan, who conceded the act in his trial, but sought to blame it on drugs. Nevertheless, a jury convicted him of first-degree murder.
At the penalty hearing, two women testified that Harlan had sexually assaulted them, as well. The jury was then instructed by the judge, as per Colorado law at the time, to make an “individual moral assessment” in deciding whether Harlan should receive a life sentence or the death penalty. (As a wise judge once noted to me, the judicial system cannot decide whether someone will die, but only when.)
In the closing arguments, Harlan’s attorneys invoked the Bible, and G-d’s mercy on Abraham, and asked the jury to impose a life sentence. With these instructions, some of the jurors allegedly consulted the Bible itself, and one juror says that a few considered the relevant provisions in Leviticus that countenanced a death sentence for murder. Eight years after the trial, the jurors were dragged in front of the court to testify; several jurors denied seeing a Bible in the jury room, but the judge resolved the disagreement by finding that the jurors did consult the Bible. By a 3-2 vote the Colorado Supreme Court affirmed. The death sentence was revoked, and a life sentence without parole was given.
Tough question: we probably don’t want Leviticus to be the law of the land. The pork lobby would never countenance Leviticus 11:7-8. On the other hand, the Colorado Supreme Court acknowledged that it would’ve been appropriate for a juror to speak the phrase “eye for an eye” in the course of argument during deliberations. And, indeed, during the voir dire, Harlan’s attorney asked one of the jurors about his feeling about that maxim. If jurors can be trusted with following the law in the face of an oral discussion, why does the written word have such power to cloud jurors’ minds? The precedent won’t matter much: Colorado changed its law in 1999 to have judges determine death sentences, though, of course, Ring v. Arizona put the jury back in charge of the decision. It seems a hair was split awfully thin to overturn a death sentence. The dissent seems to have the better of of the argument. (People v. Harlan (Colo. Mar. 28, 2005)); People v. Harlan, 8 P.3d 448 (Colo. 2000); Kirk Johnson, “Colorado Court Bars Execution Because Jurors Consulted Bible”, NY Times, Mar. 29; History Channel documentary; “Murderers’ Row”, Westword, Jun. 7, 2001; Colorado Attorney General Ken Salazar press release, Jun. 24, 2002). The Coloradoans Against the Death Penalty page on the case has additional links. Why didn’t the Court let a new jury resolve the question instead of simply impose a life sentence? I don’t know the answer to that.
Side trivia note: in November 2001, Justin Goetz, armed with three firearms, set the Creazzo family’s car on fire and threatened to shoot his ex-girlfriend, Creazzo’s daughter–but the paralyzed Creazzo defended herself by shooting Goetz first. (Sue Lindsay, “Man sentenced in bid to gun down good Samaritan (17 years in slay attempt)”, Rocky Mountain News, Oct. 3, 2002; AWARE page on Creazzo).
Book review: “A Little Crazy”
I was in the New York Post on Sunday, reviewing John D. Gartner’s book The Hypomanic Edge: The Link Between (a Little) Craziness and (a Lot of) Success in America, a book that straddles the pop-psychology and business genres. No real legal/policy content, but the byline does mention this site.
Cougar attack lawsuit dropped
35-year-old Mark Reynolds was attacked and half-eaten by a mountain lion, while he crouched to fix his bicycle along Cactus Ridge Trail on January 8, 2004. The same day, the same cougar attacked Anne Hjelle, who was rescued. Reynolds’s family sued Orange County, California, but dropped the suit in the face of pressure from Reynolds’s fellow cyclists, who were worried that the lawsuit would provoke the county into prohibiting wilderness cycling. (Rachana Rathi, “Mauled Cyclist’s Family Drops Lawsuit”, LA Times, Mar. 29; Rachana Rathi, “Fatally Mauled Biker’s Parents Sue O.C.”, LA Times, Mar. 26; LA Times Editorial, “Joy, and Danger, of Wilderness”, Mar. 27; another website summary of lion attacks; Dan Koeppel, “The jaws of death”, Mountain Bike, Summer 2004). Wildlife officials destroyed the cougar responsible for the attacks, but California law otherwise prohibits hunting or killing mountain lions.
Today’s police chase lawsuit round-up II
So, you’re a police officer and you see a Nissan truck zoom through a stop sign at 40 mph. You give chase, but the car speeds up and drives even more erratically. Do you:
(a) View this as a sign that this maniac driver must be stopped?
or
(b) Stop the chase. The guy is driving dangerously!
Lawsuit after lawsuit posit that police act inappropriately by not stopping the chase — even though that effectively creates a policy that rewards, and thus encourages, miscreants who put other drivers at risk by trying to escape the police. Simply put, policy (b) is the policy that will guarantee that drivers try to drive dangerously to force police to peel off, while policy (a) encourages all but the most wildly irrational to pull over.
In California on March 16, 2003, Joseph Boldt, allegedly under the influence of meth, sped up in his stolen vehicle after running the stop sign, and Sergeant Mark Farber followed. Boldt decided to try to escape by going southbound in the northbound lanes of I-280, at speeds of up to 110 mph, causing three other accidents before smashing into an innocent driver, Girish Wadhwani, critically injuring him. Boldt’s passenger, Bobby Luke Kleinheinz, also wanted on an arrest warrant at the time, wasn’t wearing his seatbelt and was killed; the wheelchair-bound Boldt faces second-degree murder charges, though his trial has been postponed at least a couple of times because of crash-related health problems. Kleinheinz’s family is, of course, suing the police, rather than Boldt. The Association of Bay Area Governments paid Wadhwani $3.15 million for his broken bones. “Millbrae officials said they believed Farber acted appropriately but agreed to the settlement for fear of losing an even larger award during a civil trial.” (Ryan Kim, “$3.15 million settlement in high-speed crash”, San Francisco Chronicle, Mar. 26; AP, Mar. 26; Amy Yarbrough, “Man awarded $3.15 million in damages after police chase”, San Mateo County Times, Mar. 19; “Crash trial postponed”, SF Examiner, Sep. 14; Ethan Fletcher, “Chase case heads for trial”, San Francisco Independent, Jul. 23; Michelle Durand, “Fatal wrong-way driver begins murder trial today”, San Mateo Daily Journal, Jun. 8; Michelle Durand, “Murder trial delayed for fatal wrong way driver”, Dec. 24, 2003; WPIX-5, Mar. 19, 2003; previous OL posts on high-speed chases: Mar. 15 & Sep. 21, 2003)(& letter to the editor, Apr. 12).
Disbarred in Florida
Florida, like many states, prohibits attorneys from actually chasing ambulances, but some lawyers try to circumvent this. David A. Barrett had one of his paralegals take training to be admitted as a hospital chaplain, whereupon he would solicit clients for Barrett while wearing a pastor’s uniform. The Florida Supreme Court did not look kindly upon this when he was caught. David Giacalone has enough links to all the details to shake a stick at.
Honeymoon shark attack lawsuit
Nahid Davoodabadi, honeymooning in Hawaii in 1999, disappeared while kayaking. Her husband, Manouchehr Monazzami-Taghadomi, said she was killed by a shark, and set about suing the kayak rental company, Extreme Sports Hawaii, for the accident and the federal government for failing to rescue him. Extreme noted to a jury that the company had told the couple to kayak in an area close to shore protected from winds. Extreme also noted that Maui police found the kayak, its paddles, and a lifejacket–the latter without any tears or bites (though with all the buckles unbuckled). The police also found two paddles near the kayak, one leaning against rocks, though Monazzami said, among other fishy things, that he lost one of the paddles in the shark attack. (Police never charged Monazzami, who successfully petitioned a Hawaii court to have his wife declared dead, rather than missing.) The jury exonerated the company. The Ninth Circuit recently issued a ruling affirming on technical grounds the district court’s summary judgment for the government. It appears Extreme settled the case for some unknown amount rather than go through the expense of litigating the appeal. (Monazzami-Taghadomi v. United States (9th Cir. Mar. 22, 2005); Debra Barayuga, “Company not guilty in Maui kayak death”, Honolulu Star-Bulletin, May 9, 2003; “Kayak business cleared in 1999 death”, Honolulu Advertiser, May 12, 2003; Reuters, Mar. 23, 1999; Jaymes K. Song and Gary T. Kubota, “‘Unusual’: No blood on kayak”, Honolulu Star-Bulletin, Mar. 26, 1999; Charles Memminger, “Shark tale now is part of our history”, Honolulu Star-Bulletin, Mar. 26, 1999; Brian Perry, “Tourists wary in wake of latest shark attack”, Honolulu Star-Bulletin, Apr. 1, 1999; Monazzami-Taghadomi v. 25 Knots Inc. (D. Hawaii, No. CV01-00171 ACK-KSC)). For legal scholars: one asks whether anything remains of the doctrine of “assumption of the risk” if a company called “Extreme Sports Hawaii” can’t invoke it without going through a trial and an appeal.
Patriot Ledger on Massachusetts malpractice
“We are seeing medical students today who are making their career decisions based on the risk of liability in that speciality,” says Dr. Alan C. Woodward, president of the Massachusetts Medical Society. (Sue Scheible, “Docs’ nightmare: Getting sued; Fear of malpractice can drive how treatment progresses”, Mar. 19).