California has a statute barring negligence claims by persons injured while committing or fleeing from felonies of which they have been duly convicted. In this case it operated to cut off a case by two burglars who’d hoped to get money by suing a third over their injuries in a getaway crash. [Lowering the Bar; Espinosa v. Kirkwood, No. E048472 (Cal. App. 4 Dist. June 23, 2010), PDF]
“Web’s Worst Lawyer Commercials”
Round-up from Urlesque consists of mostly familiar entries, including the classic “Hellhole You Call a Marriage” from Florida lawyer Steve Miller, who (LegalBlogWatch informs us) has changed the name of his firm from DivorceEZ.com to DivorceDeli.com.
Somehow they missed the following, from Washington attorney J. Michael Gallagher:
July 9 roundup
- Many interesting reader comments on post about jury award against manufacturer over injury on bicycle motorized post-sale;
- Reimbursed for money never paid: “Calif. Trial Lawyers Welcome Latest Ruling on Recovery of Medical Expenses” [The Recorder]
- Update: Defamation suit against travel blogger Chris Elliott resolved successfully [Citizen Media Law, earlier]
- Podcast: Northwestern lawprof Steven Calabresi on McDonald (Second Amendment incorporation) case [Federalist Society]
- “Provost Umphrey claims banana picker reps siphoned clients, money” [SE Texas Record]
- Lawprofs in a NYT flutter about deductibility of punitive damages [Walk, Drug & Device Law] On the merits, Carter at ShopFloor: “Changing Tax Laws to Punish Businesses — Unless They Settle”
- Troubled Pacific Law Center to close in San Diego [ABA Journal, earlier]
- New York high court rules Atlanta exec cannot invoke New York’s pro-plaintiff state or city laws to contest firing [NYLJ]
“Pickle bills” exempt small foodmakers
Old and new provisions in some states’ food safety rules exempt some classes of producers, such as those with revenues below $5,000 a year, makers of relatively safe items like jams and pickles, or nonprofits. Some local regulators — and some more-established foodmakers who don’t like the unlicensed and unregulated competition — are crying foul. [AP/Google via Mangu-Ward]
Who got the lowest settlement from Expedia class action?
It’s a contest! [California Civil Justice Blog, earlier]
July 8 roundup
- Federal preemption of state law: compare and contrast illegal-immigration control with auto and drug design [Ted and Carter at PoL; upcoming (Jul. 21) Cato panel discussion in DC]
- Authorities in Scotland let Lockerbie bomber off on doctor’s note. How’d that work out? [Bainbridge]
- Pay for your rescue: “French tourists may be billed if high-risk trips go wrong” [Guardian]
- Must revoke honorific California-state-rock status of serpentine! It contains asbestos! [L.A. Times “Booster Shots” via Amy Alkon]
- “Zero tolerance for bullying” — nice slogan, but think before endorsing [Helene Guldberg, Daily Mail via Skenazy]
- “The New Black Panther Case: A Conservative Dissent” [Abigail Thernstrom, NRO; earlier]
- $113,800 in damages in pregnancy-bias suit against Lucasfilm, but demand for attorney’s fees could reach $1.2 million [SF Chronicle]
- Trial lawyers fear being cut out of BP TransOcean pie [WSJ Law Blog, Bainbridge, Calif. Civil Justice]
SawStop technology, cont’d
NPR covers a story we had in March following a $1.5 million jury award. The law firm of Boies, Schiller & Flexner says it is ginning up a campaign of product liability suits to demand that power tool makers be punished for not adopting the finger-protection technology. If that isn’t enough, Consumer Product Safety Commission Chair Inez Tenenbaum says her agency may step in. What about leaving the decision to people who actually buy and use power saws, many of whom have said they have no wish to buy the expensive feature? Alas, that’s not how either the politics or the law work these days.
$20 million for Jaycee Dugard, cont’d
“What Jaycee Dugard endured is beyond comprehension, but it should be patently obvious that California taxpayers weren’t responsible for what happened to her. …This is all about money and saving face; nothing about responsibility.” [Bruce Maiman, Sacramento Bee]
Mean-girl YouTube video
The New York Times tells of a Beverly Hills, Calif. student who
videotaped friends at a cafe, egging them on as they laughed and made mean-spirited, sexual comments about another eighth-grade girl, C. C., calling her “ugly,” “spoiled,” a “brat” and a “slut.” J. C. posted the video on YouTube. The next day, the school suspended her for two days.
Now, before clicking the link, guess who collected the resulting $107,150.80. Right. Ken at Popehat thinks the judge decided the case in favor of the right party, more or less, which doesn’t keep the right party from also being a deplorably wrong party (strong language, invective, etc.)
Tom Goldstein on Supreme Court misconceptions
The publisher of SCOTUSBlog on why most of the quick ideological readings of the current Supreme Court are at best caricatures, and in particular why “it is inaccurate to describe the Court as methodically on the march to the right.” (via Adler/Volokh).