Overlawyered: Chronicling The High Cost Of Our Legal System

Accept cookies? [Y/N/Sue]

Hundreds of blogs have noted the case from Durango, Colo. (see our Feb. 4 post) in which Wanita Renea Young sued teenagers Taylor Ostergaard and Lindsey Jo Zellitti, who’d baked homemade cookies, delivered them to various homes including Young’s as a surprise, and in doing so scared Young by banging on her door at 10:30 p.m., causing her an anxiety attack. A selection of comments:

* “I find it a bit amusing that the lady is claiming that the banging on the door made her think that burglars were present…we all know how burglars knock before entering…” (commenter Mark Noonan at Dean Esmay)

* “Young said she believes that the girls should not have been running from door to door late at night. “Something bad could have happened to them,” she said.

Something bad….yeah, like getting sued!” (all-encompassingly)

* “I hate articles like this. You can’t get any decent coverage of a legal issue unless it’s coming from a legal source. … We can’t fairly critique [the judge’s] decision because we don’t know what evidence it was based on. We don’t know what evidence it was based on because the article is clearly and fundamentally biased in favor of the defendants.” (Drew Vogel of the Terminus blog, commenting at Dean Esmay)

* “The karmic beauty, of course, is that for $900 this lady will be known the world over for fifteen minutes of ignominy and a couple of decent girls will wind up on the talk show circuit or have some good material for college essays.” (commenter docpops at Metafilter)

A sampling of others (warning, serious rudeness in some): BoingBoing, Ben Kepple, WizBang, RajeRant (“It’s times like this that I’m ashamed to be a lawyer”), Cliffs of Insanity, FishTown Chatter, Distorted Perspective, Ambulance Down.

Filed under:

Appeals panel rejects tobacco disgorgement

In a severe blow to the federal government’s wretched racketeering lawsuit against major tobacco companies, a panel of the D.C. Circuit, split 2-1 along ideological lines, has held that the Justice Department can’t seek disgorgement penalties of $280 billion against the companies. (AP/Forbes; Fox News). For our commentaries on this bipartisan disgrace of a lawsuit, see Sept. 21 and links from there, as well as Sept. 24. Reactions: Competitive Enterprise Institute, Mike DeBow, Anthony Sebok.

Filed under:

Yogi Berra v. “Sex In the City”

By reader acclaim: “The Yankee legend has filed a $10 million lawsuit against Turner Broadcasting Systems for using his name in a ‘hurtful’ advertisement for its ‘Sex and the City’ reruns.” (Dareh Gregorian, “Unberrable ‘Sex'”, New York Post, Feb. 2; “Yogi Berra sues for $10M over sex ad”, CNN/Money, Feb. 3; complaint at The Smoking Gun). At his Sports Law blog, Greg Skidmore, our guestblogger, thinks there may be something to Berra’s claim (if not its $10 million demand) under the current state of the law.

Filed under: , , ,

Ohio AG: Attorneys that challenged election results should be sanctioned

“Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro has asked the Ohio Supreme Court to sanction four lawyers who handled a legal challenge, later withdrawn, to last year’s presidential election in Ohio.” The challenge focused on the long lines faced by voters, a claimed shortage of voting machines in African-American neighborhoods, and potential fraud. The AG’s motion calls the election challenge “meritless” and claims it was done for “partisan political purposes.” The motion continues, “A contest proceeding is not a toy for idle hands. It is not to be used to make a political point, or to be used as a discovery tool, or used to inconvenience or harass public officials, or to be used as a publicity gimmick. [It] is a wholly inappropriate forum to address the localized problems of long lines, shortages of machines, failing to receive notice of the proper voting precinct or casting of provisional ballots.” (Reginald Fields, “Attorney general’s call to punish lawyer is reply to election challenge,” Cleveland Plain-Dealer, Jan. 19; Editorial, “Blaming the messengers,” N.Y. Times, Feb. 3). See also earlier posts (Dec. 20; Dec. 15.)

Filed under: , , ,

Don’t like the results of a government report? Sue.

“A nonprofit group that objects to a 2001 [GAO] report on Title IX, the 1972 law that bars gender discrimination at schools receiving federal funds, has decided to sue the messenger. The report, ‘Intercollegiate Athletics: Four-Year Colleges’ Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams,’ found that the number of men’s and women’s sports teams both increased from 1981 to 1999, although the rise in men’s teams was smaller. The report was a blow to critics who argued that enforcement of Title IX had encouraged colleges and universities to cut men’s programs to comply with the law.” So, one group hurt by the study, the College Sports Council, decided to sue, claiming that the methodology was flawed and that the results have “misled” Congress. Comptroller General David M. Walker said that this is the first time the GAO has been sued over the contents of a report. But, as Walker said, “In America, anybody can sue anybody about anything.” (Christopher Lee, “Nonprofit Sues GAO Over Title IX Report,” Wash. Post, Jan. 10).

Filed under: ,

Triple Play of Lawsuits

As I reported over on Sports Law (Feb. 1) and is also reported on Common Good (scroll down), disgruntled parents should beware the potential wrath of their children’s coaches. Parent Marc Martinez was not happy with his son’s baseball coach, John Emme, and filed a lawsuit against him “alleging that [coach Emme] hurt his son’s chances at a college baseball scholarship” by forcing him to throw too many pitches and by making “derogatory comments about [his] pitching ability to potential college coaches.” ( Martinez’s son had a 4-7 record that year.) The case received both local and national media attention and Martinez was not kind in his descriptions of Emme. So, Emme countersued for damage to his reputation. The jury favored Emme, dismissing Martinez’s claims against him and awarding the coach $700,000. Said one juror, “I think this should send a message to parents.” (Dave McKibben, “Corona del Mar High Coach Big Winner in Slander Suit,” L.A. Times, Jan. 28).

Filed under: , ,

Appellate Court: Jordan suit should be heard by jury

Michael Jordan sued his ex-lover in 2002, claiming that she attempted to extort $5 million from him. The woman, Karla Knafel, countersued and claimed that “Jordan owed her the money for remaining silent and agreeing not to file a paternity suit after she became pregnant.” The district court dismissed the case, stating that the claim was extortionate and against public policy. The state appellate court, in a ruling yesterday, overturned this ruling and reinstated the case. The court wrote that the claim “is not inherently coercive or exploitive or motivated by an improper influence” and should only have been dismissed “if it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proven” entitling her to win. “We find that whether this particular oral agreement was exploitive or coercive is a matter best left to the trier of fact.” (Mickey Ciokajlo, “Jordan Headed Back to Court,” Chicago Trib., Feb. 4).

Filed under:

Sued for leaving cookies on porch

Colorado: “Two Durango teens thought they’d surprise neighbors with nighttime deliveries of home-baked treats. But one woman was so terrified, she sued and has won.” But Wanita Renea Young, 49, was so unnerved by the knocks at her door at 10:30 p.m. that she called sheriffs and then sought emergency room care for an anxiety attack. The teenage cookie-leavers, Taylor Ostergaard and Lindsey Jo Zellitti, wrote her letters of apology, but she sued anyway and won $900. (Electa Draper, “Cookie klatch lands girls in court”, Denver Post, Feb. 4). More: National Review Online notes the case and radio host Steve Gill tells how to send the girls money. A day or two later: public support and media appearances roll in for the cookie girls (Denver Post, Feb. 6; more). And David Giacalone enters a dissent.

Filed under: ,

Train crash worsened his drinking: $8.5 million payout

“A train conductor won an $8.5 million settlement from a railroad after claiming that a 2002 collision between his commuter train and a freight train worsened his alcoholism. Patrick Phillips, 52, contended that a mild concussion suffered in the crash triggered a desire for alcohol that transformed him from a ‘controlled’ alcoholic into one who drank himself into malnutrition and eventual dementia, his lawyer said. Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway confirmed Tuesday that it settled the case out of court.” (AP/Lakeland Ledger, Feb. 2; Dan Weikel, “Conductor’s Crash Suit Is Settled”, L.A. Times, Feb. 2).

Filed under: