Justice Alito wittily defends Justice Sotomayor. [BLT/NLJ]
CPSIA, big and small business, cont’d
Rick Woldenberg casts a skeptical eye on the Toy Safety Certification Program (TSCP), a voluntary toy-safety program promoted by both the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and the Toy Industries Association that in some respects goes beyond even the requirements of the CPSIA. His contention: “the TSCP significantly favors mass market companies in an almost shameless way.”
“The Supreme Court v. Patent Absurdity”
“No, you shouldn’t be able to patent a ‘method of speed dating.'” [Gordon Crovitz, WSJ]
November 16 roundup
- German law firm demands that Wikipedia remove true information about now-paroled murderers [EFF] More: Eugene Volokh.
- “Class Actions: Some Plaintiffs’ Lawyers Fed Up, Too?” [California Civil Justice]
- Drop that Irish coffee and back away: “F.D.A. Says It May Ban Alcoholic Drinks With Caffeine” [NYT]
- Profile of L.A. tort lawyers Walter Lack and Thomas Girardi, now in hot water following Nicaraguan banana-pesticide scandal [The Recorder; my earlier outing on “Erin Brockovich” case]
- Federalist Society panel on federalism and preemption [BLT]
- Confidence in the courts? PriceWaterhouseCoopers would rather face Satyam securities fraud lawsuits in India than in U.S. [Hartley]
- Allegation: Scruggs continuing to wheel and deal behind bars [Freeland]
- Not much that will be new to longtime readers here: “Ten ridiculous lawsuits against Big Business” [Biz Insider] P.S.: Legal Blog Watch had more lists back in June.
Internet service providers liable for online securities frauds?
Andrew Moshirnia at Citizen Media Law sounds the alarm about a provision of the proposed Investor Protection Act of 2009 that could punch an exception in Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act, which now generally protects ISPs from liability for actions of third-party users. An investment-fraud exception could serve (he warns) as an entering wedge for other groups to pursue similar exceptions for other types of online content.
Persons accused of domestic violence have right to hearing
That’s a more controversial proposition than you might think; the Connecticut Supreme Court was split 5-2 in agreeing that a hearing was necessary to confirm the validity of a protective order against a defendant who has been accused but not convicted. The case pitted the state ACLU against the Connecticut Coalition Against Domestic Violence. [Connecticut Law Tribune via Amy Alkon]
Calorie count labeling for vending machines
It’s in a provision “buried deep in the House health care bill”. [Glenn Thrush, Politico, via Katherine Mangu-Ward, Crispy on the Outside]
The fifteen-minute shower
“Here’s a surprise: people hate federally mandated low-flow shower heads. And the nannies are planning to make them worse.” [For What It’s Worth on this WSJ report]
U.K.: “Police worker fired for backing psychic investigations claims religious discrimination”
Having succeeded in winning a ruling that his beliefs in spiritualism and mediums qualify as a form of religious belief, Alan Power can proceed with his suit alleging that he was improperly dismissed because of them. His case “follows a landmark ruling last month that environmental views should be considered equivalent to religious and philosophical beliefs”. [Telegraph, Independent] (& welcome Popehat readers)
Update: “Sodium lawsuit against Denny’s dismissed”
Nation’s Restaurant News (via Russell Jackson): “A New Jersey Superior Court judge dismissed a lawsuit Tuesday accusing Denny’s Corp. of perpetrating fraud by not disclosing the amount of sodium in its food. The lawsuit, the first sodium-related case against a restaurant company, was filed this summer by a New Jersey man with help from the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a Washington-based consumer advocacy group.” Earlier here and here. Update/clarification: judge gave leave to amend, so action is expected to continue.