- Correct result, yet potential for mischief in latest SCOTUS climate ruling [Ilya Shapiro/Cato, my earlier take]
- Wouldn’t even want to guess: how the Howard Stern show handles sexual harassment training [Hyman]
- Philadelphia: $21 million award against emergency room handling noncompliant patient [Kennerly]
- Antitrust assault on Google seems geared to protect competitors more than consumers [Josh Wright]
- “They knew there was a risk!” Curb your indignation please [Coyote]
- Theme issue of Reason magazine on failures of criminal justice system is now online;
- “Why Your New Car Doesn’t Have a Spare Tire” [Sam Kazman, WSJ]
Posts Tagged ‘antitrust’
Will California regulate social networking?
State Senator Ellen Corbett (D-San Leandro) has vowed to press the idea, the apparent idea being that the government is a better guardian of privacy interests than Facebook and similar services [Jacqueline Otto, CEI “Open Market”] Meanwhile, Geoffrey Manne reports that the feds are itching to start an antitrust or unfair competition case against Google [Main Justice via Truth on the Market]
October 4 roundup
- O.J. Simpson trial 15 years after [Tim Lynch, Cato at Liberty; a couple of my reactions back then]
- Hackers expose internal documents of British copyright-mill law firm [Steele, LEF] Insult to injury: now that target law firm may be fined for privacy breach [same]
- BAR/BRI antitrust case: “Judge Cites ‘Egregious Breach’ of Ethics, Slashes Law Firm Fee from $12M to $500K” [ABA Journal]
- “Confessions of former debt collectors” [CNN Money via CL&P]
- Big investigative series on prosecutorial misconduct [USA Today]
- “Even with malpractice insurance, doctors opt for expensive, defensive medicine” [Jain/WaPo] “Medical malpractice suits drop but take a toll” [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; Paul Carpenter, of the Allentown Morning Call, on problem and possible solutions] A contrary view: Ron Miller.
- “Card check is dead … long live card check” [Hyman]
- “Canada: Deported Russian spy sues for readmittance” [four years ago on Overlawyered] A role model for some in the spy ring recently deported from the U.S.?
Why would a union favor its own decertification?
The better to sue, it seems [Marcia McCormick/Workplace Prof]:
The NFL Players Association is seeking player approval to decertify in advance of a potential lockout by owners in March when the current collective bargaining agreement expires, according to the SportsBusiness Journal. Decertifying would allow players to sue the owners under antitrust laws if the owners did lock the players out. And any effort to impose a labor agreement on the players could provide the players with treble damages.
This was the tactic the players resorted to in 1989, and it eventually gave them enough leverage to establish free agency in 1993, when the players recertified the association as their exclusive representative.
Antitrust experts ponder NFL exemption
Is it imperiled by a recent Supreme Court decision? A paper to be presented at the Cato Institute’s Sept. 16 Constitution Day conference looks into the question. [Josh Wright, Truth on the Market; date now fixed]
“Lower Your Newspaper Advertising Prices, Pay a $21 Million Fine”
Matt Welch scrutinizes a San Francisco “predatory pricing” antitrust verdict that you’d really think would be raising more alarm in publishing, and other, circles. [Reason]
Netflix sued for making subscribers wait for hot releases
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]
February 3 roundup
- Many of our readers liked the ruling, but someone didn’t: “Judge censured for ordering class-action lawyer to take pay in $125,000 worth of gift-cards” [BoingBoing, ABA Journal, Leonard/L.A. Times, Lowering the Bar]
- “NFL Concedes In Who Dat Battle” [Lowering the Bar, more, earlier; here’s a protest t-shirt, and more on those]
- Some plaintiff’s lawyers give their side of the story, disputing fraud allegations in Dole banana-worker pesticide cases [Bronstad, NLJ, earlier]
- “Google Blog Bundle — 42 criminal defense blogs” [Mark Bennett] And while you’re at it, why not take a moment right now to put Overlawyered in your RSS blog reader?
- Massachusetts hardball: state lawmaker says private law schools might be breaking antitrust laws in working to oppose state school proposed in his district [ABA Journal via Above the Law; public law school plan OK’d]
- Making the rounds: why medieval trial by ordeal may not have been so crazy after all [Peter Leeson, Boston Globe and full paper (PDF) via Volokh]
- “Rothstein E-Mails Reveal Role of Former Plaintiffs’ Lawyer” [Brian Baxter, AmLaw Litigation Daily]
- Obama: I tried to reach across aisle on medical liability reform but GOP wasn’t nibbling. Fact check please [Wood, PoL]
Book pricing antitrust petition
“The American Booksellers Association loves people who buy books. It loves them so much that it wants to protect them from wicked retailers who sell popular titles at affordable prices.” [Jeff Jacoby, Boston Globe] More: Mark Perry.
Related: antitrust laws mostly “used today by one group of competitors to try to hamstring another competitor in their business” [Coyote on IBM mainframe investigation]
More on cosmetics giveaway settlement
Susan Taylor Martin writes in the St. Petersburg Times on problems with class-action settlements, including a recent one in Florida that seems basically to have pitted Florida drivers against Florida taxpayers (she quotes me on how this can empower lawyers to move money from our left pockets to our right pockets at a high overhead cost). She also reports on the national cosmetics giveaway that recently took place following a class-action antitrust suit (see Jan. 29, etc.) A highlight:
I also asked Saveri [San Francisco class-action attorney Guido Saveri, one of the lead counsel] if he thought the giveaway program had been rather loosely administered. Customers didn’t have to prove they were part of the class, and there was nothing to stop them from getting as many cosmetics as they could. The result: Stores quickly ran out and a lot of people who were members of the class didn’t get anything.
“I think it was very well administered,” Saveri said, a bit huffily. “Each person had to file a piece of paper that they were entitled to one product — whether you want to lie about it I can’t control that.”
Before we hung up I asked Saveri if any of his female relatives got free cosmetics. Turns out the giveaway was off limits to attorneys’ families.
But with $24 million, they can afford to shop at Neiman-Marcus. As for me, I’ll wait until L’Oreal goes on sale at my local CVS.
Back in November 2006, we called it a “no-blush, high-gloss, invisible-foundation antitrust class action”.