Madison County lawyers get $84M, class members get $8M

“Lawyers took home 10 times more than their clients in a $350 million settlement with AT&T and Lucent Technologies Inc. that ended a class-action suit in Madison County, according to figures provided recently by Lucent.” Even though class members only received $8.4 million, compared to the $84.5 million paid out to the plaintiffs’ lawyers, the settlement was announced as a $350 million settlement. Thus, in the well-publicized, but flawed, Eisenberg-Miller study that purports to show that plaintiffs’ lawyers aren’t overpaid in state court (Feb. 20 and Jan. 16), it would be counted as a return of 24%, rather than over 90%. Class lawyer Stephen Tillery, who is regularly in the news (e.g., Jan. 2), and whose firm collected $16 million of the fees, has suddenly decided that ethical obligations regarding current litigation prohibit him from discussing numbers when asked for his version of the figures, which he initially disputed. (Trisha Howard, “Lawyers profit most in suit, defendant says”, St. Louis Post Dispatch, Mar. 30).

Update, April 8: Professor Eisenberg disingenuously defends as an “exception” the Lucent settlement against a USA Today editorial–based on his own flawed study! (Theodore Eisenberg, “Separate myths from facts”, USA Today, Apr. 7; Editorial, “Fees line lawyers’ pockets”, USA Today, Apr. 7) (via Bashman).

“Bizarre Hoaxes On Restaurants Trigger Lawsuits”

If it becomes just a little more expensive to get a fast-food meal these days, it’s in part because a hoaxer–perhaps a single individual in north Florida–is calling restaurants around the country and persuading gullible managers to strip-search employees and customers. Restaurants, fearing lawsuits, are conducting defensive training to inculcate the common sense needed to avoid being fooled by such a call. (Steven Gray, Wall Street Journal, Mar. 30; Editorial, “Strip search is no ‘prank'”, Arizona Republic, Apr. 4; Charles Williams, “Restaurant Industry Warns Members to Beware Strip-Search Hoax”, Charleston Post and Courier, Apr. 2; “Lawsuit Filed After Strip Search Hoax”, WCVB, Feb. 26).

Update: “compulsory chapel for lawyers” upheld

The Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled that it is constitutional to require lawyers to attend periodic classes on eliminating bias, rejecting the contention that such courses amount to a form of compulsory indoctrination. (“High court upholds required anti-bias classes for lawyers”, AP/Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Mar. 25; David L. Hudson, Jr., “Required Course on Bias Upheld”, ABA Journal eReportl, Apr. 2). See Nov. 21 and links from there. For a defense of the program, see David Giacalone, Mar. 25.

Tipsy totterer: I didn’t mean to sue airline

Curious update to our item of three days ago: Floyd Shuler, who slipped on an escalator after drinking on a flight, now says he “didn’t intend for the suit to be filed. ‘I learned about the filing of the lawsuit against US Airways … along with everyone else,’ Shuler said. ‘It was never my intent to take on the airline industry. I apologize for any inconvenience this has caused US Airways.’ Shuler’s attorney, Paul Kutcher, did not return a phone call from The Associated Press seeking comment.” (“Man Drops Suit Filed Against Airline After He Drank Booze, Fell”, AP/Tampa Bay Online, Apr. 1).

“The Great Car-Rental Wipeout”

William Tucker, writing in the New York Sun (Apr. 1), explores the ruinous consequences of the state’s vicarious-liability law for independent car rental agencies (via Spartacus). See our piece of last Jun. 9 as well as Jul. 14 and links from there. More: Chrysler has now joined GM and Ford in refusing to lease in New York, while Honda has resumed offering leases, but at special high prices intended to compensate for the state law. (“Chrysler to stop leasing in New York”, Bloomberg/Detroit Free Press, Mar. 26)

New batch of reader letters

We’ve posted four more entries from our still backed-up pipeline of reader letters, on our letters page. Among topics this time: the unsuccessful suit demanding that taller airline passengers get first dibs on roomy exit-row seating; big business’s enthusiasm (sometimes) for antitrust law; the now-defunct database which offered to track patients who sue doctors; and fear of volunteer plumbers.

Reparations: the British must pay

Three new reparations campaigns are aimed at perfidious Albion; if they succeed, we propose going after them for their burning of American towns during the Revolutionary War and War of 1812:

* In Buenos Aires, Argentina, Carlos Traboulsi, who is president of the local Christian Democrats, has filed a $67 billion (U.S.) claim against Britain in a local court, citing the unlawful occupation/exploitation of the Falklands/Malvinas islands since 1833 as well as “the theft of the River Plate Viceroy treasury in 1806”. What, didn’t any lawyers advise him to file in a U.S. court? (“67 billion dollars claim for ‘Malvinas usurpation'”, MercoPress, Mar. 10.)

* Ten plaintiffs are suing Lloyd’s of London in New York, demanding that it pay reparations for having written insurance on slave ships hundreds of years ago (“Slave descendants to sue Lloyd’s”, BBC, Mar. 29). Some in the British press are taking at face value the image attorney Edward Fagan would like to present of himself as the “feared New York lawyer who extracted huge Nazi gold settlements from German and Swiss companies” (“Slave descendants sue Lloyd’s for billions”, The Observer, Mar. 28); they should have read our Jun. 24-25, 2002 report (see also Aug. 8, 2003; Jan. 17-19, 2003; Nov. 17-19, 2001).

* “A half forgotten colonial expedition to subjugate a querulous African kingdom more than a century ago could bankrupt Britain if a Ugandan king succeeds in bringing a ?3.7 trillion suit against the Crown.” During a five-year war in the 1890s the British deposed King Kabalega II of the Bunyoro kingdom, and his descendant, named King Solomon, has now retained lawyers in both Uganda and London and plans a legal action in the latter city. “But the king’s compensation claims do not appear to enjoy much support from his subjects. ‘This is very wrong,’ said Aisha Kungozo, 24, a teacher who runs a tiny school for 16 children in the village of Mparo outside Bunyoro’s capital, Hoima, where the royal palace is situated. ‘The British built schools and houses for us. They gave us medicine. They did more to help us than any omukama [king] ever did.'” (Adrian Blomfield, “African king aims to bankrupt Britain”, Daily Telegraph, Mar. 13).

Latest newsletter

Our latest free newsletter, summing up the past 3 weeks’ or so worth of items on the site, went out this afternoon to its 2300+ subscribers. If you didn’t receive it, you can sign up here for future mailings and to read older newsletters. It’s a great way to keep up with items on the site you may have missed.

U.K.: “New law threatens Punch and Judy shows”

Punch and Judy, the puppets who have thrilled British children for almost 350 years, may disappear from Britain’s beaches because of a new law requiring puppeteers to apply for entertainment licences.” There are currently 300 Punch and Judy shows across Britain, typically roving from one spot to another where there are strolling families. The “booths are already liable to inspection from councils. The new rules will force them to apply for an additional entertainment licence each time they change pitch, which will not only be expensive but could take up to four weeks to process.” (Rajeev Syal and Graham Mole, “That’s not the way to do it: new law threatens Punch and Judy shows”, Daily Telegraph, Mar. 21). The law could also imperil other traditional English street entertainments such as strolling clowns and — yipes — Morris dancing (“Circus clowns say show must go on”, BBC, Mar. 24). Update Jan. 2, 2006: law took effect in November with only limited exemptions.