“Ohio physicians fight back”

The Ohio State Medical Association is documenting instances of baseless litigation against doctors and assisting doctors in sanctions motions against opposing lawyers who bring “shotgun” lawsuits without investigation against every doctor who treated a plaintiff. The effort is believed to be the first of its kind. (Tanya Albert, American Medical News, Feb. 16; Tanya Albert, “Fighting frivolous lawsuits: Doctors engage in an uphill battle”, American Medical News, Oct. 27, 2003) (via LitiGator).

Update: “Woman drops lawsuit over Jackson peep show”

Just in case anyone missed this while we were away: only a few days after filing her class-action lawsuit (Feb. 5, Feb. 8) demanding billions from MTV and other defendants over Janet Jackson’s Super Bowl stunt, Terri Carlin of Knoxville, Tenn. “believes she’s made her point” and is withdrawing the suit. (AP/CNN, Feb. 10; see Blog 702). The attorney who represented Carlin in the action, Wayne A. Ritchie II, would appear to be (per his website) a figure of some dignity in the Knoxville legal community: a former state legislator, he “has served on the Board of Governors of the Knoxville Bar Association and on the Board of Governors and Executive Committee of the Tennessee Trial Lawyers Association.” (See also May 28.)

Update: “Scientists win Kennewick Man ruling”

“The scientific community should be allowed to study the 9,000-year-old human bones known as Kennewick Man, a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled [last week], rejecting an appeal by several tribes claiming kinship and seeking to rebury the remains.” The court found little evidence of either a genetic or a cultural link between the prehistoric corpse and present-day Indian tribes. (Tom Paulson, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Feb. 5) (see Sept. 27-28, 2000; Oct. 11, 1999). See “In our view: Kennewick Man” (editorial), The Columbian (Vancouver, Wash.), Feb. 8; Moira Breen; Lex Communis; Brian Doherty, Reason “Hit and Run”, Feb. 12; Sarah Graham, “Scientists Win Latest Ruling in Kennewick Man Case”, Scientific American, Feb. 6. More: Aug. 2.

Update: NYC’s lead balloon

The New York City council has overridden Mayor Bloomberg’s veto and passed its Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Act, notwithstanding critics’ warnings that the bill will stack the deck in favor of liability lawsuits against Gotham’s rental property owners (see Dec. 15). My Manhattan Institute colleague Julia Vitullo-Martin sounds the alarm (“Killing housing”, New York Post, Feb. 5). Update Jun. 2: housing market thrown into turmoil.

Ninth Circuit judge: sure, sue over ozone damage

“Although the earth’s evaporating ozone layer affects millions of people, the damage is concrete enough that an individual can sue violators of the Clean Air Act, according to a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judge. … [Judge Ronald] Gould opined that an individual can have standing to sue for global injuries which affect millions of people, such as ozone depletion, despite some precedent that widely shared injuries are so broad that they preclude individual damages.” Though it’s only a concurrence, it’s likely to encourage the global-warming-suit movement described in this space Feb. 6-9 and Jun. 12-15, 2003; Jul. 31 and Aug. 10-12, 2001, and Aug. 19, 1999. (Alexei Oreskovic, “Global Standing for Ozone Suits”, The Recorder, Feb. 9).

Climbing on dump trucks isn’t negligent

Or at least so it’s being argued: freelance photographer Robert Levin is suing carting company Waste Management LLP for $50 million over injuries he suffered after he climbed on one of its garbage trucks to take pictures of Ground Zero and fell off. Levin’s attorney, Howard Klar of Manhattan, denied that his own client was negligent in the matter: “he never thought in a million years the truck would move.” (John Marzulli, “Ground Zero gawker sues for garbage-truck injury”, New York Daily News, Feb. 10).

“Patents out of control?”

PanIP, the firm that demands five-digit sums in licensing fees from small companies using e-commerce upon threat of vastly more expensive patent infringement litigation (see Feb. 4-5, 2003), gets coverage in USA Today as part of a larger story on the costs of questionable patents. (Paul Davidson, Jan. 13). A defense fund claims to have successfully moved the Patent Office for reexamination of the Lockwood e-commerce patents last summer; PanIP’s infringement lawsuit has been stayed in the interim.

Others, however, continue with the same strategy. At least three game designers have reported receiving a demand letter from a lawyer representing Sheldon Goldberg, who purports to have patent claims on, among other things, computer solitaire, on-line game rankings, and pop-up advertising. (A Shareware Life blog, Jan. 31; SCWatch.net, Jan. 24; LawGeek blog, Jan. 26; copy of demand letter).