- “Judge in Asbestos Litigation Says Navy Ships Aren’t Products” [Legal Intelligencer]
- NYT goes in search of the trial lawyers’ case on the Blitz gas can bankruptcy [earlier here, here]
- Gun control lobby hails as “groundbreaking” NY appellate court allowing suit against gun manufacturer [WSJ Law Blog, NYLJ]
- “Mechanical Bull Tosses Rider, Prevails in Court” [Abnormal Use]
- Well-known expert witness pops up in consumer popcorn injury case [Drug and Device Law] 2004 Missouri workplace exposure case: “‘Popcorn Lung’ Couple Gets $20M Award, Files for Bankruptcy” [ABC News]
- “Bumbo Baby Seat Recalled Because It Is Only 99.999475% Safe” [Skenazy, Agitator]
- “Summary Judgment For Crocs in Massachusetts Escalator Injury Case” [Abnormal Use]
Posts Tagged ‘apparel’
Maternity support pillows: the regulatory costs
Kerri Smith came up with a new design for a maternity support pillow and decided to sell it online. Then came the unpleasant surprise: 15 states require “law tags” on pillows and each charges its own fee, ranging from $5 to $720 a year. First year cost of complying with those state laws in order to start taking orders from anywhere in the country: $4,660. And that’s before more states join the 15 that currently exact fees. [Becket Adams, The Blaze/WTAM] As for a pillow intended for the actual baby, don’t even ask.
The FTC’s sketchy Skechers settlement
Columnist Debra Saunders quotes me on the Federal Trade Commission’s extraction of $40 million from a shoe maker for hyping its sneakers in its ads. As Saunders points out, we rely on Washington, D.C. for help on issues like this since if there’s anything the political class is earnestly opposed to, it’s overpromising. [San Francisco Chronicle]
Jacket toggles that could get caught on doorways
The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) stands guard against them. [Lenore Skenazy, Free-Range Kids]
Good for the sole
And helps in avoiding heels too: “That’s the best way: You just get on with the whole thing. Never mind suing anyone. And just do something different.” — NYT’s Bill Cunningham on the Louboutin trademark litigation over red soles on fashion shoes (via Ann Althouse, who now offers an all-law-blog option).
November 8 roundup
- “Dad Settles Suit Against Crocs Over Daughter’s Escalator Injury” [ABA Journal, Knoxville News]
- Almost unheard-of: “California state bar to investigate 130 prosecutors” [LEF]
- Judge flays U.S.-based lawyer in Chevron-Ecuador suit [Law.com, more, Dan Fisher/Forbes]
- “Federal Government Acknowledges Constitutional Limits on Housing Discrimination Law” [Eugene Volokh on HUD dismissal of “Christian-roommate” complaint, earlier]
- “Brave and brilliant decision” from Judge Posner points way to provide relief from class action plaintiffs who won’t accept defeat [McConnell and Beck, Trask]
- “Referring to Former Boss as Slimebag Does Not Constitute Disparagement, At Least in Ohio” [Robert Fitzpatrick]
- “Couldn’t get elected dogcatcher” — actually, dogcatching’s harder than being a Senator [Christopher Beam, Slate]
- Midterm election wipeout — for Republicans, that is [four years ago on Overlawyered]
Hell’s Angels sue Saks Fifth Avenue
Over its alleged fashion use of the Angels’ trademarked “death’s-head” image [Legal Blog Watch]
Ugg-ly trademark lawyering?
According to Felix Salmon, the company that owns the trademark in most countries on “Ugg” for sheep-fleece footwear has used it in “extremely aggressive” fashion against competitors, most particularly against exports from Australia where the term is generic and small firms have produced boots and shoes under similar names for many years.