Larry Ribstein has a commentary (Jan. 6) on the just-announced WorldCom settlement, in which ten of the company’s directors, notably including prominent former Georgetown Law School dean Judith Areen, agreed to contribute $18 million from their own personal funds toward the settlement of investors’ class action claims arising from the company’s giant accounting scandal. Update Jan. 12: following closely on the heels of the WorldCom settlement, Enron directors agreed to a settlement likewise throwing personal funds into the kitty; in this case the semi-celebrity outside director who settled was Wendy Lee Gramm. Ribstein again comments.
Tune in: CNN, Wisconsin radio
I’m scheduled as a guest tomorrow on CNN Saturday Morning (8-9 a.m. Eastern time slot), discussing recent developments in criminal cases such as the overturning of Andrea Yates’s conviction (as opposed to civil litigation, my more usual topic)(more on criminal law). And today at around 2:35 p.m. Central I’m scheduled to appear on Madison, Wisc.’s WIBA radio, discussing President Bush’s medical malpractice proposals (more on medicine and law).
Rats vs. ratings
A man upset by what he saw on NBC’s “Fear Factor” is suing the program. He says he threw up after he saw contestants eat (drink?) rats chopped up in a blender. Austin Aitken is a regular viewer of the program and was fine with shows in which contestants ate worms and bugs. He says he’s not concerned with actually winning, just sending a message to NBC. His suit asks for $2.5-million. Associated Press, “Rats don’t rate with viewer,” Jan. 7. From the story:
Aitken, a 49-year-old part-time paralegal, said he wants to send a message to NBC and other networks with the lawsuit. He said he isn’t concerned with winning a cash judgment in court.
On that note, Eugene Volokh points out the following from an earlier Reuters report: “In a brief telephone interview with Reuters, Aitken said, ‘I am not at liberty to discuss the complaint unless it is a paid-interview situation.'” Reuters, “NBC’s ‘Fear Factor’ Sued for Rat-Eating Episode,” Jan. 5. Update Mar. 15: judge tosses suit.
“Judge to hubby: forget prenup, pay up”
Donna Austin, 37 at the time, signed a prenuptial agreement waiving alimony before marrying Craig Austin back in 1989, in what was a second marriage for both parties. Nonetheless, a Massachusetts appeals court has decided that her alimony waiver is “unreasonable” and will not be enforced. A lawyer for Craig Austin says his client plans appeal and says Donna Austin benefited substantially from the division of property assets from the marriage. (David Weber, Boston Herald, Dec. 30). And the New Jersey Supreme Court has been asked to decide whether Craig Caplan, who retired in his 30s with a so-called silver parachute, should be obliged to return to the work force to pay increased child support, thus sparing his ex-wife Sandra the need to dip into her $2.4 million divorce settlement; for more on the “imputed-income” doctrine, see Sept. 18, 2003 (Michael Booth, “In Divorce Case, Early Retiree Gets Tangled in Silver Parachute”, New Jersey Law Journal, Oct. 6).
Conference next Thursday: lessons of the 9/11 fund
Next Thursday, Jan. 13, the Manhattan Institute’s Center for Legal Policy is giving a half-day symposium in Washington, D.C. on “The 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund: Successes, Failures, and Lessons for Tort Reform”. The event is at the Hyatt Regency on Capitol Hill and runs from 8:30 a.m. to 2 p.m. (agenda and registration). I’ll be on the second of the day’s two panels with very brief remarks responding to the primary paper(s). Among notable panelists are Yale Law’s Peter Schuck and Robert Reville, director of the Rand Institute for Civil Justice; Kenneth Feinberg, Special Master of the 9/11 Fund, will deliver the luncheon address.
Overlawyered on Orlando radio
I’ll be a guest on 1190 WAMT in Orlando this Saturday, scheduled to appear on “Legal Forum” at about 2:35 p.m. Eastern. Internet streaming is available on their site.
Do not use toilet brush for personal hygiene, and other wacky warning labels
Michigan Lawsuit Abuse Watch’s Eighth Annual Wacky Warning Labels is out. (See also 2004 and earlier.) Other highlights include an electric hand blender warning (“Never remove food or other items from the blades while the product is operating”) and a scooter that warns “This product moves when used.”
Suing New York City
Some of the characters who’ve sued the New York City government in cases previously unremarked on this site:
* The alleged wife-beater who, on being arrested by police, stumbled drunkenly down the stairs and broke his ankle, though he got nothing from a Manhattan jury;
* The legally blind Bronx man who “drove his car into a concrete barrier” and sued arguing that better lighting might have prevented the accident;
* The man who sued for wrongful arrest after being charged with buying a stolen SUV at a city airport parking lot for $75; he claimed in his unsuccessful suit (PDF) that he thought that was a legitimate sale price;
* The “two inmates who shot themselves with a smuggled handgun in their Rikers Island jail cells — and sued. (A guard was responsible, they argued before a judge kicked out their case.) ”
Meanwhile, a 1998 jury award of $76.4 million to remains on appeal; that’s the one where “a reputed Bronx gang member [was] left paralyzed by a gunfight with an off-duty police officer. The city argued that the officer only returned fire after the plaintiff shot at him with a Tech-9 submachine gun.” (Larry McShane, “Who Do You Call When Someone Says ‘Sue the City’? Meet Michael Cardozo”, AP/New York Lawyer, Dec. 20). Two other cases won by the city this summer, not mentioned in the article: this excessive-force case (PDF) involving a Bronx man who tried to escape two officers in a high-speed chase (more high-speed chase cases); and this slip-fall accident (also PDF) in which the locus and circumstances of the injury seemed mysteriously to have revised themselves in a manner unfavorable to the city. (More on suits against New York City.)
Cheated workers
Ohio workers who got their jobs through a welfare program are suing the state for improper compensation. Example: As part of his welfare benefits, Bruce Smith stripped floors in Youngstown when his knee snapped as he bent to pick up a bucket of water. His attorneys argue he should have received worker’s compensation based on his pre-welfare salary, not on his food stamp allowance, according to a state supreme court decision. The state says the ruling “applied to death benefits, not regular workers comp claims.”
The welfare program is a tiny part of overall claims. The workers compensation bureau has paid about $6 million for 3,200 successful welfare worker claims to date, compared to about $2 billion last year alone in regular claims, Hicks said.
The Equal Justice Foundation says the number of potential claims is much higher. In court filings accompanying the lawsuit, foundation attorneys say the figure is over 5,000, citing workers’ compensation bureau e-mails.
Smith, 59, went on welfare after he was laid off from his job making bumpers for a General Motors parts supplier. He was injured in April 2003 on a job he received in Mahoning County as a condition of getting $139 in food stamps weekly.
Associated Press, “Lawsuit Alleges Workers Hurt On Welfare Jobs Cheated,” Jan 4.
MSNBC’s “Abrams Report” tonight
I’m scheduled to be a guest on MSNBC’s “Abrams Report” tonight at 6 p.m. Eastern, discussing the impact of litigation on society.