Longtime Overlawyered blogger Ted Frank just saved class members more than $25 million in a case in which his Center for Class Action Fairness had objected to the attorneys’ fee request in a settlement against Citigroup. Ted argued that the plaintiff’s lawyers were marking up to associate-level rates, at $400/hour or more, the work of contract attorneys who were being paid $50/hour or less for document review and similar tasks. Accepting the critique in part, the “order by U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein in New York cut the fee award to Kirby McInerney by $26.7 million to $70.8 million.” [Daniel Fisher/Forbes, WSJ, Point of Law and more]
The durable myths of the CRPD
Once again it is rumored that the Senate will take up the U.N.-sponsored Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Once more the editorialists at the New York Times are promoting the treaty with some dubious — in some cases, easily disproved — claims about what it would and would not do. I look at the controversy in a new post at Cato at Liberty.
Plus: Prof. Jeremy Rabkin testimony and more.
August 2 roundup
- Radley Balko on a roll with harrowing, Louisiana-focused piece on misbehaving prosecutors and the system that protects them [HuffPo] “Former Cops Speak Out About Police Militarization” And a BBC interview (auto-plays video);
- Judge Alsup: pay-to-play allegations against Democratic Attorneys General Association, Mississippi attorney general Jim Hood, MSPERS won’t derail class action [Courthouse News]
- “Smoker’s Son Recovers $12.8M for Loss of Consortium” [NLJ]
- How easy is it to get a free federal cellphone (or two or three) without actually qualifying? [Jillian Kay Melchior, NR]
- “‘Total’ly Milking the FCPA Cash Cow?” [Koehler, FCPA Professor]
- “The unfair attack on arbitration” [Hans von Spakovsky]
- How public interest litigators got 501(c)(3) charitable status [Scott Walter, Philanthropy Daily; related earlier]
Update: HuffPo yanks its fast-food-wages piece
Yesterday I poked fun at a ridiculous piece at HuffPo (apparently written by an undergraduate who was given a byline as a university researcher) claiming that doubling wages at McDonald’s would be no big deal for its prices or business strategy. Well, hats off to HuffPo, which has now withdrawn the piece, apologized for its errors, and substituted a piece that tries to take a more sober look at the issue. I wonder whether Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), who was completely taken in by the original article, is feeling sheepish now (via Twitchy).
Detroit’s dismal decades, cont’d
“Detroit had the highest property tax rates of all 50 [largest U.S.] cities” [Chris Edwards/Cato, Alex Tabarrok] Some of the city’s weaknesses go back far enough that Jane Jacobs was pointing them out in 1961 [Urbanophile] How other cities avoided Detroit’s fate, and why, as Boeing shrank, “Will the last person to leave Seattle please turn out the lights?” turned out to be such a misplaced joke [Ed Glaeser, 2011 via Amy Alkon] And in two Cato podcasts on the city’s plight, Caleb Brown interviews Megan McArdle (Daily Beast, Bloomberg) and Emily Washington (Mercatus Center). Plus: Some reasons Baltimore is not Detroit [Frank DeFilippo, Splice Today] And Stephen Eide on the pension-negotiating strategies of emergency manager Kevyn Orr [Public Sector Inc.]
California inmates sue outside businesses
An inmate serving a long term at Solano state prison in California “has filed a lawsuit against a Sacramento-area car-repair-shop owner asking for $15,000 in damages for the lost use of his transmission.” While a 1996 federal law places limits on suits by federal prisoners, inmates in state prison systems like California’s, what with indulgent filing rules and plenty of time on their hands, “can tie up the court system with cases that would strike most anyone as frivolous. Their court fees are typically paid for by California taxpayers.” [Steven Greenhut, San Diego Union-Tribune]
Police and prosecution roundup
- Detroit police blasted for arresting Free Press photographer who filmed arrest with her iPhone [Poynter]
- “The discomfort of principles” in criminal defense matters [Gideon’s Trumpet]
- House Judiciary panel on overcriminalization and mens rea shows genuinely useful bipartisanship [Jonathan Blanks, Cato] One in four new bills these days to create criminal liability lacks mens rea [Paul Rosenzweig/Alex Adrianson, Heritage]
- Auburn, Alabama: “Cop Fired for Speaking Out Against Ticket and Arrest Quotas” [Reason TV]
- Film project on overturned Death Row convictions [One for Ten] “Forensics review reveals hair evidence was possibly exaggerated in 27 capital cases” [ABA Journal]
- Critics of Stand Your Ground seem to be having trouble coming up with examples to back their case [Sullum]
- Maine: “Hancock County prosecutor admits violating bar rules in sexual assault trial” [Bill Trotter, Bangor Daily News]
A whopper about fast-food wages
So McDonald’s Dollar Menu would go up only to $1.17 if the company doubled all wages? Oh, Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), you’re so gullible it’s almost cute. [Tom Maguire]
Update: Well, hats off to HuffPo, which has now withdrawn the piece, apologized for its errors, and substituted a piece that tries to take a more sober look at the issue. I wonder whether Rep. Ellison is feeling sheepish now (via Twitchy).
A libertarian Supreme Court? (If only)
Writing at the New Republic, Simon Lazarus of the left-leaning Constitutional Accountability Center says “the recent surge of libertarianism among conservative academics, advocates, politicians and, of course, voters… has shown up among court-focused conservative constituencies and advocates and begun to register at the Supreme Court.” He cites the Cato Institute’s remarkably successful amicus curiae season (mentioned earlier in this space) and discerns in the majority an “appetite for doctrinal resets aimed at crippling federal regulatory power.”
In response, Randy Barnett, whose writings have been influential in advancing what libertarian tendencies may exist on the Court, writes “I wish it were so. … For a few reasons, the Court has become more ‘libertarian’ than its members.” Ilya Somin disputes Lazarus’s claim that the ObamaCare challenge invited the Court “‘to junk the “New Deal settlement” that bars constitutional interference with regulatory and safety net legislation.’ Even if the challengers had prevailed on every point at issue in that case, Congress would still have sweeping authority to regulate virtually any ‘economic activity,’ and state governments would have even greater regulatory authority than that.”
Quebec’s Bill 101 strikes again
The province has informed teenage entrepreneur Xavier Menard that his business name is too English to be legal under its obligatory-French-language law. The name in question: “WellArc.” [Huffington Post Canada]