The movies-by-mail service cut a deal with Warner Bros. in which it agreed to make subscribers wait 28 days before sending out a new DVD release from the studio. A customer now claims it’s an agreement in restraint of trade. [NY Daily News]
On “best attorney” sites
Robert Ambrogi at LawSites checks out one recent entry.
London borough of Islington sues itself
And then demands attorneys fees over unjustified litigation; the dispute was over a parking ticket issued to one of its own departments which it wrongly presumed to be legally independent. Another local council won a fine against itself which it then had to pay, according to British author Barrie Segal [Lowering the Bar, Times Online “Money Central”]
March 4 roundup
- “Toyota Recall: Scandal, Media Circus, and Stupid Drivers” [Dushane, Car & Driver via Prof. Bainbridge] Some parallels with Audi sudden-acceleration panic [Michael Fumento, who also questions recent numbers] More: Mike Allen, Popular Mechanics via Instapundit (“why widespread theories about electrical throttle problems and electromagnetic interference are misguided”); and Fumento on braking capacity.
- Overly hot sandwich caused $2 million worth of damages, he says, though it’s true he didn’t seek immediate medical attention [Lowering the Bar, earlier]
- Rick Esenberg on judicial recusal wars in Wisconsin and nationally [Point of Law first and second posts] In Circle of Greed, lawyer/felon Lerach flings recusal issue against late father of Carly Fiorina [Gerstein, Politico; our earlier Lerach coverage]
- And more: Notwithstanding earlier denials, Lerach did lobby President Clinton to veto securities litigation reform act [Gerstein, Politico]
- Claim by Connecticut AG and Senate candidate Richard Blumenthal: lawsuits he files “actually create jobs” [Wood, PoL]
- Setback for prolific patent litigant Bender [Zura via Joe Mullin, related]
- Following complaints by traditional video store competitors, prosecutor threatens criminal charges unless DVD rental kiosks remove R- and even PG-rated films [Indianapolis Star via Indiana Law Blog]
- Lawyers send clients to chiropractor, he sends clients to lawyers, circle of life continues [Louisville Courier-Journal via Legal Blog Watch]
Eugene Volokh on Reason.tv
Great interview with the prolific and influential UCLA law professor (and founder of the Volokh Conspiracy blog) in which he talks about the Bill of Rights, the “hostile environment” menace to free speech, why we should not necessarily expect judges to strike down bad laws, concealed carry and the gun control issue, and the nannyism potential in tort law (& welcome Erin Miller, SCOTUSBlog readers).
“Anyone with money can sue anyone [with] less money and put them out of business”
“It doesn’t matter whether you have a case or not.” Reflections on legal friction between competing websites that assist in bringing reporters together with sources [Alain Raynaud, FairSoftware, via Pete Warden]
More leads in Luzerne County, Pa. judicial scandal
Before the sensational revelations of corruption in juvenile justice sentencing, investigators had been tipped off about suspicious judicial handling of car-crash arbitrations and suits filed by attorneys in the Pennsylvania county. Those are rumored to be among the focus points of ongoing probes directed at attorneys as well as judges and those in other branches of government. [Legal Intelligencer]
Unlawful for hardware store to give customers free coffee and doughnuts
So says the health department in Ventura County, Calif., rebuffing the B & B Do It Center of Camarillo. [Ventura County Star]
More: In a followup story (h/t gitarcarver), county officials say they were drawn into enforcement action because the store had been demonstrating barbecue makers using actual meat, and then proceeded to add the edict barring coffee and doughnuts.
New book on Bill Lerach, “Circle of Greed”
Kim Strassel reviews it in the Wall Street Journal:
Much of the riveting detail in “Circle of Greed” comes from Mr. Lerach, who cooperated fully with the authors. They seem to buy his line that his actions were motivated by his desire to protect innocent shareholders from greedy corporations. The book’s overall argument—as the title suggests—is that it was corporate greed that created Mr. Lerach and provided a model for his ethical failings. That claim is unfair to the many honest companies who were Lerach victims and implausible in any case, thanks to the authors’ own vivid evidence of Mr. Lerach’s outsize criminal behavior.
More: At New York Times “DealBook” (via Pero), Peter Henning reviewing the same book traces Lerach’s downfall in part to the nature of his famous “I have no clients” practice:
Clients are an important constraint on lawyers, the restriction on their desire to push as hard as possible for every little victory in a case. …
When your opponent is your enemy, and you can say whatever you want because there is no client there to restrain your baser instincts, then at some point you will step over the line and perhaps eventually pay a price.
Henning also recounts Lerach’s famous vendetta against scholar/consultant Daniel Fischel (“I will destroy you”), which put the world on notice of the class actioneer’s character years before the main scandal hit.
CCAF on KOGO (San Diego) this evening
I’ll be on KOGO-600 AM’s Top Story with Chris Reed tonight at 6:35 pm Pacific discussing recent CCAF cases and the problem of bad class action settlement cases generally.