Martha Stewart defended

Softening his former view of the Martha Stewart affair, Stephen Bainbridge suggests that the government may be overreaching in prosecuting Stewart for publicly denying a charge of insider trading when it does not see fit to charge her with insider trading itself (Oct. 7; Oct. 8; Oct. 9; Oct. 10; Oct. 14; and follow links from the various entries). See also Reason’s recent cover story with its unnecessarily provocative title and subhead (Michael McMenamin, “St. Martha”, Oct.). Other views: Yin Blog, Oct. 8: Daily Kos, Jun. 5; Chris Byron, “$uper Winter Sale for Martha Stewart”, New York Post/Fox News, Jun. 11. Update Jan. 27 (trial).

Yipes

EthicalEsq?, one of the very short list of weblogs that we recommend to absolutely everyone interested in the law, is suspending publication while its author, David Giacalone, concentrates on health battles. Even if we didn’t find ourselves in agreement with David’s views as expressed on the site (and we nearly always do) we’d admire the way he’s staked out one vital beat, legal ethics, and come through with consistently insightful commentary. Let’s hope David enjoys a speedy return to good health; in the mean time, in less than half a year of publication so far he’s compiled valuable archives on such subjects as class actions, lawyer discipline, and, of course, fees.

Chapman on ADA misconduct case

“You may think it’s prudent to keep anyone prone to substance abuse away from large, shiny objects that go boom. You might laugh out loud at someone who insists that a firing offense may not be taken into account when he asks to be rehired. But you are not a judge on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. … the fact that Hernandez’s claim could be upheld by a federal appeals court indicates just how far the ADA went in accommodating people who prefer not to take responsibility for their own actions.” Steve Chapman on the ADA right-to-return-after-misconduct case currently before the Supreme Court (see Oct. 7, Sept. 16-17, 2002) (“Making a drug ‘disability’ an asset”, Chicago Tribune, Oct. 12). Update Dec. 13: Supreme Court rules.

Secondhand smoke vs. firsthand contraband

One of the larger costs from the lack of tort reform is not so much the damages awards to undeserving plaintiffs or the fees that plaintiffs’ lawyers extract or the cost of hiring lawyers to defend, but the social costs imposed when decisions are made to avoid the risk of litigation: playgrounds shut down, bans on cold weather swimming (“Don’t be so wet”, The Economist, Oct. 2 (subscription required)).

The repercussions have been particularly severe in Colorado, where a fear of secondhand smoking suits caused the prison system there, where the vast majority of the 18,000 prisoners incarcerated are smokers, to ban tobacco. The result? An immediate creation of a black market with markups for tobacco far exceeding that for cocaine, and the expected associated violence and corruption that goes along with a widespread black market in prison. Eighteen guards, teachers, and supervisors have been prosecuted in three years, and a prisoner newsletter calls the tobacco contraband law “a retirement assistance program for correctional officers.” (Kirk Mitchell, “Ban turns tobacco into prison prize”, Denver Post, Oct. 13).

Update: two personal-responsibility cases

Updating a case covered on Mar. 28, 2000: a Texas court of appeals earlier this year reversed an award of $43 million (voted as $65 million by the jury, then reduced by the trial judge) against Honda to the survivors of a woman who accidentally rolled her car off a boat ramp into Galveston Bay and at autopsy was found to have .17 alcohol in her bloodstream. Her survivors argued that she was trapped in the sinking car by her seat belt, but the appeals court said they had not shown that any alternative belt design would have been any safer overall. Incidentally, this particular Galveston boozy pier roll-off award is guaranteed to be a different case entirely from the Galveston boozy pier roll-off award discussed in this space Aug. 28, in which the city of Galveston and its pier lessee were supposedly the ones to blame, the verdict came in at $10.5 million, and an appeals court again threw it out (Mary Alice Robbins, “Texas Court Reverses $43M Judgment Against Automaker”, Texas Lawyer, Feb. 19).

In an even more belated update, pool owners in Massachusetts were given a reason to heave a sigh of relief when the plaintiff cited in our Jan. 24, 2000 item, an experienced swimmer of 21 years old, lost his appeal before the state’s highest court in which he had argued that his girlfriend’s grandparents should have warned him not to dive into the shallow end (Pierce, Davis & Perritano, LLP, “Open and Obvious Danger Doctrine Reaffirmed”, Winter 2001; for details of case see also Cathleen F. Crowley, “Court decision could impact pool owners”, Lawrence Eagle Tribune, Jan. 4, 2000).

Chicago lead paint case dismissed

“A judge has dismissed the City of Chicago’s lawsuit seeking hundreds of millions of dollars from lead-based paint manufacturers, saying the city had not proven that the companies created a public nuisance.” (“Chicago’s lawsuit over lead paint dismissed”, AP/Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Oct. 8). The New York Times recently noticed one complication affecting the diagnosis of an “epidemic” of lead poisoning among inner-city children, namely that a large share of urban kids found to have high lead-blood levels are immigrants from countries where lead exposures are very high (Kirk Johnson, “For a Changing City, New Pieces in a Lead-Poisoning Puzzle”, New York Times, Sept. 30 (fee archives); Steven Malanga, “The Lead Paint Scam”, New York Post, Jun. 24, 2002, reprinted at Manhattan Institute site (same point); our entry for Oct. 28-29, 2002).

Bill Shoemaker, 72

Legendary record-setting jockey Bill Shoemaker died today at the age of 72. The New York Times obituary (Joseph Durso, “Bill Shoemaker, Jockey With Winning Touch, Dies at 72”, Oct. 12) only lightly touches on one of the less admirable incidents of Shoemaker’s life. Shoemaker was driving after a couple of beers–enough to make the 98-pounder legally drunk according to a blood test. When he reached for his car phone, he lost control of his vehicle, and crashed down a steep embankment, paralyzing him beneath the armpits. Shoemaker sued the auto manufacturer, the state of California (for failing to install guardrails on a straight road), and the seven doctors who saved his life–a decision he said he regretted in a 1999 interview: “Shoemaker says he always has felt solely responsible for the accident. ‘I’ve never asked, “Why me?” because it was my own fault. I did it. I can’t blame anybody else. I was at that point at the beginning.’ He now expresses regret over the suits, saying he only followed his attorney’s advice.” (Nancy Kruh, “Legendary Shoemaker has made peace with his new ride”, Dallas Morning News, June 25, 1999).

Larry Schonbrun profile

Our primary editor, Walter Olson, is quoted in an East Bay Express profile of “The Spoiler”, Larry Schonbrun, a former Neighborhood Legal Assistance Foundation lawyer who now specializes in taking on class action settlements where the plaintiffs’ lawyers seek extravagant attorneys’ fees. (E.g., May 28). “To date, Schonbrun has convinced judges to reduce such fees by more than $100 million.” (Susan Goldsmith, “Class Action Warrior”, Oct. 8).

Tobacco recoupment suit loses in France

Declining to follow our bad example: “A French health authority has lost its attempt to sue four tobacco companies for the cost of treating thousands of cancer patients. In the first case of its kind in France, the national health insurance fund (CPAM) in Saint-Nazaire had demanded 18.6m euros from BAT-Rothmans, Philip Morris, JTI-Reynolds and Altadis. The CPAM said it was the amount it had spent treating more than 1,000 people with smoking-related diseases.” A court threw out the action as ungrounded in law. “‘It is interesting to note that no jurisdiction in Europe has so far allowed this kind of surrogate action against cigarette manufacturers,’ said BAT in a statement.” (“Health fund loses tobacco fight”, BBC, Sept. 29)(see Oct. 7, 1999 (Israel) and Feb. 1-3, 2002 (foreign governments suing in U.S. courts).