“[W]hat really merits outrage about DDT today” is its underuse, as millions die annually of malaria for lack of the reviled pesticide, writes New York Times editorialist Tina Rosenberg. Commentators such as ABC’s John Stossel got to the story first (see CEI, Todd Seavey), but the Times may be more effective at reaching those who can do something about the state of the law (New York Times Magazine, Apr. 11).
Med mal: around the blogs
Not that this exactly qualifies as news, but Sen. Tom Daschle says things to pro-tort-reform constituents back home that are rather different from what he says in Washington, notices the South Dakota Politics blog (Apr. 4, Apr. 7). And the departure of a surgeon in MedPundit Sydney Smith’s home town, coinciding with a particularly obdurate sound bite from ATLA-admired Sen. Patrick Leahy, prompts her (Apr. 10) to give the Vermont Democrat an Open Secrets look-up (see also MedRants, Apr. 8, with comments section). Dr. Smith also notes (Apr. 6) that the med-mal crisis in famed Madison County, Ill., may play a role in the contemplated closure of Scott Air Force Base in Belleville.
“Dodgy Patents Rile Tech Industry”
Many techies are nervous if not aghast about the issuance of a number of patents by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in recent months, including one “awarded to security firm Network Associates that gives the company rights to technology that deletes ‘undesired data’ from a computer”, and “another that gives Amazon.com the right to charge other website operators for using browser cookies that store data structures”. (Amit Asaravala, Wired News, Apr. 5). Another controversial one: Frank Weyer and Troy Javaher of Beverly Hills were recently issued a patent for an Internet naming system. Earlier this year, they sued leading domain registrars Network Solutions and Register.com for alleged infringement of their patent. “The patent covers the method of assigning URLs and e-mail addresses of members of a group such that the “@” sign is the dot in the URL. For example, if a group used a so-called third-level URL, www.john.smith.com, the e-mail address would be john@smith.com.” (Marguerite Reardon, “Domain registrars sued over URL patent”, CNETNews.com, Jan. 15; “Nizza Group Sues Network Solutions and Register.com for Patent Infringement”, news.webhosting.info, Jan. 11). Weyer and Janaver’s Nizza Group issued a press release Jan. 8 about its success; its lawsuits have drawn much criticism in such places as The Register (Kieren McCarthy, “Patent lawyer puts claim to entire Internet”, Jan. 17; Geek.com (Jan. 20); Slashdot).
Easter chocolate bunny lawsuit
Swiss confectioner Lindt has filed for an injunction against the Austrian company Hauswirth, claiming that chocolate bunnies in gold foil are a Lindt trademark. Hauswirth says it has been producing such bunnies in Austria since 1962, and that Lindt previously lost a similar lawsuit against German rival Riegelein. (AFP, Apr. 8).
Auto-seller sued for elderly test-driver’s accident
William Cecil Weeks was test-driving a car when he ran a red light and hit Vicki Hiers’s pickup, ejecting her from the vehicle and causing brain damage. This, the Hiers family claims in a lawsuit filed by Michael Strickland, is the fault of Ken Isaacs Chevrolet-Cadillac in Moultrie, Georgia, because they let the 86-year-old test drive a car alone. (Lori Glenn, “Lawsuit alleges negligence in wreck”, Moultrie Observer, Apr. 10). Under Georgia law, Code 40-8-76.1, item D, the auto dealer is not allowed to defend itself at trial by alleging that Ms. Hiers might not have been ejected from her pickup had she worn her seat belt, but perhaps they will be able to note that auto salespeople are not imbued with the power to hit the brakes from the passenger seat (& letter to editor May 7).
“Lawyers Shift Focus From Big Tobacco to Big Food”
People may have laughed 16 months ago when obese teenagers unsuccessfully sued McDonald’s, saying its food made them fat. But a well-honed army of familiar lawyers who waged war against the tobacco companies for decades and won megamillion-dollar settlements is preparing a new wave of food fights, and no one is laughing.
[…]
“I think it’s a mistake, and I’ve told clients this, to underestimate the creativity and the imagination and very frankly the aggressiveness of the plaintiffs’ bar,” said Joseph McMenamin, a defense lawyer and doctor in Richmond, Va. “They have a hell of a track record, frankly. They kept slogging away on tobacco and eventually they prevailed, and the sums of money companies had to pay exceed the gross national product of some third-world countries.”
(Kate Zernike, New York Times, Apr. 9) (via Bainbridge).
Movie theater pays $3M for relationship gone bad
You’re looking at the headline and thinking that a victim of sexual harassment got a windfall, but the plaintiff was 52-year-old movie theater manager Gary Trepanier. Trepanier was dating a part-time concessions worker; the movie theater chain, National Amusements, found out about the relationship when he filed for a personal protection order against her phone calls after the relationship ended, and fired him for favoring the employee. Trepanier’s lawyer, Glen Lenhoff, claimed this violated the Michigan Whistleblower’s Act, and a jury awarded $1M in past and future wages and $2M for past and future mental anguish. (Ken Palmer, “Jury awards $3 million in cinema manager’s firing”, Flint Journal, Apr. 8).
Update: NJ $1.5M high school basketball verdict overturned
Superior Court Judge Paulette Sapp-Peterson threw out the $1.5M jury verdict Jennifer Besler had obtained against her basketball coach Daniel Hussong and the school district (Mar. 25), saying that Besler had not proven any real damages from the coach’s yelling at her. The $100,000 verdict her father obtained for being gaveled into silence at a school board meeting stands. The Besler family and their attorneys have already promised to appeal. (Linda Stein, “Judge reverses verdict against coach”, Trenton Times, Apr. 9; Lisa Meyer, “Judge nullifies jury?s decision”, Trentonian, Apr. 9; AP, Apr. 9; Scott Frost, “Case opens coaches? eyes”, Trentonian, Apr. 9).
Update: (Linda Stein, “Coach longs for lost reputation”, Trenton Times, Apr. 10).
Update, Apr. 13: (Henry Gottlieb, “Court Bounces Cager’s Claims That Caustic Coach Did Emotional Harm”, New Jersey Law Journal, Apr. 13) (via Bashman).
Asbestosis testing scandal
The Mobile Register has a devastating expose of the asbestosis screening mills (Jan. 21 and links therein). Dr. David Egilman, who had testified for over 100 plaintiffs, has switched sides in the wake of abuses.
Over the years, he said, as the trial lawyers who hired him sent along the medical records of the plaintiffs, Egilman became increasingly troubled by what he saw.
“I realized at some point that some of these people are not really sick,” Egilman said in a telephone interview last week. “From a policy perspective, I’m interested in justice. If all the people who are not sick get money, then there won’t be enough money for the people who are sick — that’s the main issue.”
Egilman said he believes that screening companies do two things that violate good public policy: They help generate tens of thousands of plaintiffs who aren’t suffering from asbestos-related illness, thus draining billions of dollars from those who are ill; and they can create substantial health concerns on the part of those who get tested.
The Register also interviews Dr. Greg Nayden, who quadrupled his salary by returning a 100% hit rate in his asbestosis screenings, and uncovers a number of similar incredible tales. (Eddie Curran, “Diagnosing for dollars?”, Mobile Register, Apr. 4). As Professor David Bernstein points out, the failure of judges to enforce existing standards for expert testimony in the asbestos context has made such abuses possible. (“Keeping Junk Science Out of the Asbestos Litigation”, 31 Pepperdine L. Rev. 11 (2003)).
Inmate lawsuit scam busted
According to a recently filed indictment, three “maximum-security” inmates at the D.C. jail plotted to smuggle a gun in–not for reasons of revenge or escape, but, rather, to shoot themselves and then sue the city for failing to protect them from an “unknown” assailant. And, indeed, they did succeed in getting a gun into the jail, shooting themselves, and reporting themselves as victims of an unknown criminal. Unfortunately for these budding Professor Moriartys, they also shot a fourth inmate who now claims he did not want to be shot, and he broke up the scheme. A lawyer for one of the other three maintains that the shootings were the result of innocent bystanders being shot from a drug deal gone bad. (Henri E. Cauvin, “Inmates Charged With Plot to Get Shot, Sue D.C.”, Washington Post, Apr. 8).