George Leef at The Freeman newly reviews my book on the abuse of mass litigation from a few years back. “Well-researched and deliciously written” — thanks!
“Courts Reward Helicopter Parents, Two Law Profs Say”
Paging Lenore Skenazy! “Courts are rewarding ‘intensive parenting’ and making it a legal standard, particularly in custody disputes, two law professors say in a paper that will be published in the U.C. Davis Law Review.” Gaia Bernstein (Seton Hall) and Zvi Triger (College of Management School of Law, Israel) say custody law rewards parents for greater involvement in their kids’ lives even if it amounts to over-involvement. “In tort cases, courts are narrowing or eliminating the parental immunity doctrine and creating the potential for judgments against parents for inadequate parental supervision.” [ABA Journal, “Over-Parenting” on SSRN; Prawfsblawg]
“Beer pong players sue over inclusion in ‘World’s Funniest Commercials’ video”
The plaintiffs said to avoid embarrassment, they consented to the broadcast of their extreme beer-pong skills only in Denmark. Unfortunately, the ad went viral. [THR, Esq.]
Hostage sues government that rescued her for $6.8m
After a storm of criticism, Ingrid Betancourt withdrew her request for money from the government of Colombia, which launched a commando operation that rescued her from FARC guerrillas in 2008 after a six-year captivity. [Guardian, Moynihan/Hit and Run]
Muslim woman demands female attendant for emergency-room EKG
Rona Mohammedi is now suing Somerset Medical Center in New Jersey because it told her only male ER technicians would be available to check whether her severe chest pains were the result of a heart attack. [Newark Star-Ledger, White Coat]
Dodd-Frank whistleblower provisions
There are lots of them tucked into the bill, and they will probably come at a significant cost for companies in the economy’s financial sector, as I explain in a new post at Cato at Liberty (earlier; more on qui tam and whistleblower matters more generally).
Fire? Blame the halogen lamp
The Texas Supreme Court applies skepticism to the theories of a plaintiff’s expert witness in a suit against Wal-Mart. [Wajert; Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Merrell, No. 09-0224 (Tex. 6/18/10), PDF]
Lileks on Pamplona
“If the event was held in America the bull would be in the back of a pickup truck going five miles an hour, and all the runners would have to wear helmets. The bull would wear a helmet.” [Ricochet.com]
Get that anti-Scruggs blogger! Get him!
During the long series of scandals that brought down former tort potentate Richard (“Dickie”) Scruggs, of tobacco-asbestos-Katrina-mass tort fame, no blogger achieved the status of “must” reading more consistently than David Rossmiller of Insurance Coverage Blog. Now Alan Lange of Mississippi site YallPolitics (and co-author of Kings of Tort, a book on the scandal) has posted a massive document dump of emails between the Scruggs camp and its public relations agency, as made public in later litigation (see also). It shows the principals:
* boasting of their success in manipulating major media outlets to inflict bad publicity on the targets of Scruggs’s suits;
* plotting ways of striking back against critics — in particular, Rossmiller — with tactics including going after him with legal process, as well as creating fake commenters and whole blogs to sow doubt about his reporting;
* wondering who they might pay to secure “Whistleblower of the Year” awards, or something similar, for their clients;
* apparently oblivious, just days before the fact, as to how the ceiling was going to cave in on them because of Judge Henry Lackey’s willingness to go to law enforcement to report a bribe attempt from the Scruggs camp.
The whole set of documents, along with Rossmiller’s summary and reaction, really must be seen to be believed. It will easily provide hours of eye-opening reading, both for those who followed the Scruggs affair in particular, and for everyone interested in how ambitious lawyers manipulate press coverage to their advantage — and how they can seek to use the law against their blogger critics. (& welcome readers from Forbes.com and Victoria Pynchon’s “On the Docket” column there).
July 15 roundup
- More outcry over report of big new Treasury tax break for injury lawyers [Chris Moody, Daily Caller, Wood/ShopFloor]
- Geologists’ annoyance over bill to oust asbestos-containing serpentine as California state rock makes NYT front page [yesterday; Dan Walters, Facebook group, Calif. Civil Justice, Bailey via Adler, earlier]
- Great moments in international human rights: “Known al-Qaeda Operative Could Not Be Deported [from UK]” [Foster, NRO]
- “Is the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act a Government Cash Cow?” [Koehler, FCPA Professor]
- Franklin Mint case cont’d: “Manatt Tries to Beat Back Malicious Prosecution Lawsuit” [Baxter/American Lawyer, earlier]
- “Washington’s parasites take aim at Apple” [David Boaz, Philadelphia Inquirer]
- Gubernatorial bid by Rhode Island attorney general Patrick Lynch seems to have fizzled [Jessica Taylor, Politico via Law and More]
- Go explicit or go home: Georgia abolishes implied private rights of action [PoL, my Reason take years ago]