“A woman who admitted to drowning her three young children in her bathtub in New Cassel nearly five years ago is telling a judge that she deserves some of the money from her children’s $250,000 estate. … [Innocent] Demesyeux [father of two of the three children] settled a lawsuit against [Nassau] county last year for $250,000, claiming that social services caseworkers could have done more to save his children.” A lawsuit on behalf of the third child is pending. [Newsday]
Three lawyers depart embattled Chesley’s firm
Among the departing lawyers are those representing the state of Ohio in a public employee retirement fund-led class action; the state may not appreciate the fallout from Chesley’s efforts to fight disbarment in Kentucky over the fen-phen scandal. [Cincinnati Enquirer] Many of the one-time “Master of Disaster’s” bipartisan political ties, however, remain cozy:
Chesley noted that Hamilton County [= Cincinnati] Prosecutor Joe Deters, who has worked for Chesley as a private attorney for four years, continues to work at the firm.
Deters also works as a private attorney for the new firm created by Chesley’s former lawyers. Deters, a leader in Hamilton County’s Republican Party, praises Chesley, who has helped raise millions for Democrats…
Social media: pass it on
Bloggers who don’t link to others’ opinions miss out on half the potential of the medium, as Eric Turkewitz (New York Personal Injury Law Blog) learned to his advantage.
Best of 2012: April
- How California is that? Killer collected $30,000 in unemployment while in jail, officials say.
- Spokane city council rejects disabled-rights settlement in which it would have paid $275,000 and rehired cop after DUI.
- Why was press coverage of the Martin/Zimmerman case so bad?
- Bank “structuring”: who can get away with it, and who can’t.
- Lawyer-dad: so what if my son cheated?
- Motorcyclist blames BMW for unsought excitement.
Katz’s Bagel Bakery to Chelsea, Mass. authorities: “Hands Off My Dough”
The Boston suburb of Chelsea, emulating New York City and other municipalities, is banning trans fats in restaurant recipes effective Jan. 1, leaving bakery owner Richard Katz “vowing to stop selling pastries rather than peddle what he calls ‘awful’ tasting trans fat-free baked goods.” [Fox Boston via Keep Food Legal]
Judge finds for chicken farm, rebukes Waterkeeper, U. Md.
On Maryland’s Eastern Shore yesterday, federal judge William Nickerson ruled against a lawsuit alleging that Alan and Kristin Hudson’s family farm and Perdue Inc. violated the federal Clean Water Act. The plaintiffs, the Waterkeeper Alliance led by celebrity environmentalist Robert F. Kennedy Jr., had hoped to establish that big food processors, in this case Perdue, could be held liable for the purported pollution sins of “contract growers” like the Hudson family. Aside from its considerable factual weaknesses, for which the judge criticized the plaintiffs, the case had touched off a furor in Maryland because the University of Maryland law school’s environmental clinic had entered the lists on behalf of Waterkeeper and its long-shot theory; Democratic Gov. Martin O’Malley had sent a critical letter to the university saying it had contributed to an “injustice” against the Hudsons. The university law clinic says it’s reviewing the judge’s order in search of grounds for appeal. [Beth Moszkowicz/Daily Record, Charlene Sharpe/DelmarvaNow, MeatPoultry.com; earlier coverage, CBS Baltimore, Mark Newgent/Red Maryland; Maryland Coast Dispatch; pro-defense SaveFarmFamilies.org; legislative reaction, NLJ and more]
P.S. Don’t miss this from John Steele at Legal Ethics Forum, quoting the judge’s concluding paragraph:
The Court has no disagreement with Plaintiff that the Chesapeake Bay is an important and vital resource, that it is seriously impaired, and that the runoff from factory farms, including poultry operations, may play a significant role in that impairment. Nor does the Court disagree that citizen suits under the Clean Water Act can play a significant role in filling the void where state regulatory agencies are unable or unwilling to take appropriate legal action against offenders. When citizen groups take up that mantle, however, they must do so responsibly and effectively. The Court finds that in this action, for whatever reason, Waterkeeper did not meet that obligation.
Labor and employment roundup
- McDonald’s worker complains she’s not paid $15/hour, but there’s a logical problem with that [David Henderson]
- EEOC Phoenix office signs pact with Mexican consulates to curb discrimination against illegals [EEOC press release]
- “Former Lawmaker (and Ex-Felon) Urges Connecticut To Ban Discrimination Against Felons in 2013” [Daniel Schwartz]
- Connecticut: “NLRB sues to reinstate union saboteurs at nursing homes” [Gehrke, DC Examiner, Schwartz, Jillian Kay Melchior/NRO, earlier on pols that enable the strikers] More: Ivan Osorio.
- OSHA after clerk robbery: “handling money, working alone and standing behind open counters” expose employer to violations [OSHA press release]
- “N.D. Ill.: Under ADAAA, Asthma Triggered by Strong Perfume Might Be Disability” [Bagenstos]
- “Worker centers” allow organizers to dodge the legal responsibilities owed to workers by actual labor unions [Stefan Marculewicz and Jennifer Thomas, Fed Soc]
Best of 2012: March
- Northern California scandal: with cops’ connivance, underhanded divorce lawyers employ elaborate schemes to entrap adversary hubby into DUI arrests.
- N.J.: Passes out drunk in snowbank, bar said to be liable.
- Citing possible fat and salt content, NYC’s Bloomberg bans food donations to homeless shelters.
- Paul Krugman and “Stand Your Ground” laws.
- NYC nonprofit that’s gotten $240,000 from taxpayers teaches followers how to squat in city buildings.
- “Woman Blames McDonald’s for Prostitution”
Bork and his adversaries
I’m in today’s New York Post with an op-ed about how, agree or disagree with Bork’s views, you can’t defend many of the tactics used against him in 1987. Earlier here (& welcome Nick Gillespie/Reason, Andrew Sullivan, Stephen Bainbridge, Reihan Salam, Tom Smith, Pejman Yousefzadeh, Jonathan Adler/Volokh, Memeorandum readers).
More: David Frum recalls a very funny Bork law exam. Ramesh Ponnuru defends Bork’s famous “inkblot” comment as reasonable in its context. Much more on that question from Randy Barnett. Paul Alan Levy of Public Citizen casts a vote against. At Secular Right, I add another observation or two about Bork’s religious views. Via Andrew Grossman, a clip on the beard issue.
Yet more: Richard Epstein at Ricochet. Meanwhile, some commentators have taken the line that uncivil or not, the actual charges by Kennedy and others against Bork were accurate enough. Mickey Kaus, who is sympathetic to judicial restraint but less so to Bork, links to a 1989 New Republic review in which he shed light on that:
True, paranoia on Bork’s part is amply justified. There is a liberal legal culture, and it was out to get him. … And it got him, in part, by sleazily misrepresenting some of his views. Most famously, a narrow Bork ruling was falsely characterized as favoring “sterilizing workers.” But there were other nasty distortions, not all by fringe interest groups. Senator Edward Kennedy charged that in “Bork’s America… schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution,” when Bork had never opposed teaching evolution. Senator Paul Simon implied Bork might approve the pro-slavery decision in Dred Scott.
Free speech roundup
- Did U.K. high official use pending Leveson press inquiry to browbeat newspaper? [Telegraph via Volokh]
- Canadian blogger sued over speech by Richard Warman has a legal defense fund [Blazing Cat Fur via Instapundit, 2010 Mark Steyn]
- “Introduction To Irony: Or, How To Take A Joke 10” [Wendy Kaminer, WBUR]
- Meat industry ex-employee sues blogger who led “pink slime” campaign [Popehat, Lunch Tray/Bettina Siegel]
- 1958 ordinance still on books in Ormond Beach, Fla. prohibits distribution of publications “belittling the traditional American institutions or folkways” [Volokh]
- “We have to concede” a rhesus monkey could not beat Mme. Taitz in court battle [Lowering the Bar]
- Common Cause vs. First-Amendment-protected political speech, part umpteen [Hans Bader, CEI]