Posts Tagged ‘deep pocket’

$12.5 M verdict in pickup crash suit

On October 9, 1999, a construction zone on Interstate 70 near Warrenton, Missouri, was slick after a hard rain. An eastbound tractor-trailer hydroplaned, hit the median, and flipped over, blocking the westbound lanes. John and Shirley Mathes, driving a Ford pickup pulling a camper trailer with propane tanks, slammed into the 30-ton trailer at 60 miles per hour, and were then sandwiched by another pickup truck driving 50 miles per hour. The Matheses and their grandson died in the crash, though it was a matter of dispute whether they survived the initial impacts; medical examiners on both sides of the case found no evidence that they had.

The deep pocket in the case was Ford, and a Jackson County jury decided that, in a case where three vehicles were traveling too fast, and all three leaked fuel and ignited, it was Ford that should be legally responsible for $12.5 million in damages because the pickup truck’s fuel tank — which met a crash test three times more severe than the federal safety standard — was “defective” for not remaining intact in such a dramatic collision. (Dan Margolies, Kansas City Star, “Ford told to pay $12.5 million”, Mar. 5; AP, Mar. 4).

Disclaimer: I represent Ford in different litigation.

Filed under: autos, deep pocket, Missouri

Reparations suit dismissal, cont’d

The pseudonymous “Mindles H. Dreck” at Asymmetrical Information has some comments (Jan. 28) on Judge Norgle’s dismissal of the slavery reparations lawsuit (see Jan. 26)(documents at site of defendant Aetna). What criteria, he wonders, dictated the selection of banks, railroads, tobacco and insurance companies to be sued in the case? “1. A continuous history — who ever thought avoiding the M&A craze would be a liability? 2. Availability of records — one Historical Society officer noted to me that corporations have reconsidered or requested the return of donated archives since the suit.” Deep pockets, of course. And finally: “Defendants have to be vulnerable to PR damage.” This last point suggests why reparations advocates may not unreasonably imagine there is potential money to be made in pursuing more rounds of suits even if courts never rule in their favor.

Filed under: deep pocket, reparations, tobacco

In Inuit country, fear of U.S. lawyers

Arctic outfitters and small tourism operators in Nunavut, the far northern territory of Canada that is home to the Inuit people, are suffering the effects of a liability insurance crisis which is also affecting major landowners in the area such as Parks Canada and the Government of Nunavut. “These organizations are especially fearful of multi-million-dollar lawsuits launched in U.S. courts by aggressive trial lawyers on behalf of hurt or angry clients. ‘The landowner is always named in any lawsuit against a tourism outfitter, and as these organizations generally have the deep pockets, they will be targeted by the lawyers,’ Nunavut Tourism’s discussion paper says.” (Jim Bell, “Skyrocketing insurance batters tourism operators”, Nunatsiaq News, Nov. 28).

Filed under: Canada, deep pocket

“Lawsuits battering local governments”

Arizona: “Taxpayers have shelled out more than $140 million since 1998 to cover the cost of claims against Valley and state governments, and experts expect the losses to mount as the public sector’s deep pockets become an ever more attractive target.” Arizona Republic does a heavily reported feature on the state of public liability in the surprisingly litigious Phoenix area, including the case of the Scottsdale parkgoer who got $10,000 for being attacked by a goose. A bunch of sidebar stories too, and more is promised on Wednesday (Pat Flannery, Arizona Republic, Nov. 30)

Filed under: Arizona, deep pocket

Mississippi YMCA drowning case settles

A televised lawsuit against a Mississippi YMCA and a host of other defendants completed settlement late last week. (Terms of the settlement, no doubt motivated in part by the threat of a request for punitive damages, were not disclosed, but the lead plaintiffs’ lawyer, Dennis Sweet (see May 7 and Oct. 25, 2000), implied the total was almost $10 million.) The plaintiffs did not just sue the YMCA over their son’s drowning, but also sued a local television station’s charitable foundation because it had provided funding for the YMCA’s swimming program–which no doubt explains why the press coverage was more skeptical than it usually is when plaintiffs go after deep pockets.

Monte Barton, who represents the Y.M.C.A., says, “The Y.M.C.A. relies on [its] donors and volunteers. If they get scared away, because of the threat of lawsuits, it will definitely [affect] not only the Y.M.C.A., but other organizations like that.”

Charlene Priester, who represents the TV-3 Foundation, says, “That may indeed be something that is discussed in board rooms of charities throughout Jackson, the state and the nation since it was broadcast all over the country.”

Priester represents the TV-3 Foundation, the separate non-profit organization that helps the community. It is also out of the lawsuit now. But Priester says she’s still troubled by it.

Priester says, “Once someone has been sued in this type of lawsuit, it will always make you wonder before you do something to help. Do you subject yourself to this type of litigation?”

That’s why Priester says there needs to be some self-examination in the legal system.

Priester says, “This case might have been the poster child for tort reform…when you start suing charitable organizations when you know all they did is donate money and volunteers.”

(Dawn Russell, “Drowning Suit Draws Community Concern”, WLBT, Nov. 13; “Final defendant settles lawsuit over Jackson YMCA drowning”, AP, Nov. 15; Jimmie E. Gates, “Lawsuit over drowning settled”, Mississippi Clarion-Ledger, Nov. 15; “Three defendants agree to settle lawsuit over Jackson YMCA drowning”, AP, Nov. 14; Joanna Gaitanoglou, “All but One Defendant Dropped from Drowning Suit”, WLBT, Nov. 13; Rochelle Steinhaus, “Most parties in drowning suit settle, but trial goes on”, CourtTV, Nov. 13; complaint).

Filed under: deep pocket, Mississippi, personal responsibility, swimming

Suing NFL over fan’s DWI

A fan downed 14 beers at a New York Giants game and drove off, causing a crash that left a child paralyzed. Now the family’s lawyers want the league to pay. “I understand they are searching for a deep pocket,” said Rutgers law prof Howard Latin. “But at a certain point, people have to be responsible for their own behavior.” (Peter Pochna, “Family sues NFL for fan’s DWI that left child paralyzed”, NorthJersey.com, Oct. 10)(reg) (& see “Sports Betting: The National Football League Versus the Trial Lawyers” (commentary), Center for Individual Freedom, Oct. 16). Update Jan. 21, 2005: jury returns $105 million award against beer concessionaire Aramark after dismissal of claims against team and league.

Filed under: Aramark, deep pocket, personal responsibility, sports

Before he reached the Senate

The Boston Globe looks into Sen. John Edwards’s career before he came to Washington and finds “he was more than just a practitioner of medical malpractice law. He was one of its most prominent specialists, stretching the reach of the law for nearly two decades. But he also came to personify some of the alleged excesses that reformers have sought to curb.” Among them: emotionally manipulative trial arguments, selection of deep pocket defendants and suits on behalf of victims who had contributed to their own victimization, including a woman who committed suicide and whose survivors successfully sued the hospital with Edwards’ help. (Wendy Davis, “Edwards’s career tied to jury award debate”, Sept. 15).

Filed under: deep pocket, hospitals, John Edwards, medical, politics

Lightning bolt in amusement park’s parking lot

Cincinnati attorney Drake Ebner admits cynics will think he’s suing the Kings Island amusement park — in whose parking lot his client was struck by lightning — just because it’s a deep pocket. “But they should hold the park accountable, for not telling his client and thousands of others about an impending lightning storm, Edner said Monday. ‘They could have told the people not to go to their cars, which are large metal objects that can attract lightning.'” (Kimball Perry, “Family sues Kings Island”, Cincinnati Post, Jun. 17).

Filed under: Cincinnati, deep pocket, personal responsibility

Archived media law & free speech items, pre-July 2003

Whatever you do, don’t criticize lawyers — 2003: “The intimidation tactics of Madison County“, Jun. 9 (& updates Jul. 12, Jul. 26). 2002: “‘Ex-jurors file $6 billion suit against ’60 Minutes’“, Dec. 16-17; “Lawyers fret about bad image” (Fla. bar plans to rate and monitor tone of journalists’ coverage), Oct. 3; “Mich. lawyer’s demand: get my case off your website” (“Love Your Neighbor”, M-LAW, Overlawyered.com), Jun. 20 (& letter to the editor, July 6); “Dangers of complaining about lawyers” (Ga. considers easing defamation counter-complaints by lawyers), Mar. 30-Apr. 1. 2000: “Australian roundup” (lawyers sue cabinet minister for suggesting they overcharge and lack ethics), Sept. 6-7; “Target Detroit” (class action lawyers personally sue DaimlerChrysler lawyer, citing his critical remarks regarding them), Jul. 19-20; “Baron’s judge grudge” (lawyer bullies alt-weekly Dallas Observer over expos? March 23. 1999: “Criticizing lawyers proves hazardous” (class-action attorneys sue columnist Bill McClellan for making fun of them), Nov. 4 (updated Nov. 30 (he criticizes them again, though suit is still pending) and Feb. 29, 2000 (they agree to drop suit); “Couple ordered to pay $57,000 for campaign ads criticizing judge“, Oct. 18; “Think I’m too litigious? I’ll sue! (II)” (lawyer sues over being called ambulance chaser), Aug. 16.

Hate speech, hate crime laws, 2002: “British free-speech case“, Dec. 18-19; Letter to the editor, Oct. 23; “Cutting edge of discrimination law” (Huckleberry Finn in schools), Oct. 7-8; “Prominent French author sued for ‘insulting Islam’“, Aug. 23-25 (& Sept. 18-19, Oct. 25-27 (acquitted)); “French ban sought for Fallaci book on Islam“, Jun. 11-12; “Our editor interviewed“, May 29. 2001: “Australia: anti-American tripped up by speech code“, Dec. 21-23; “Compulsory chapel for Minn. lawyers“, Dec. 18; “EU considers plans to outlaw racism“, Dec. 5-6; “U.K. may ban anti-religious speech“, Oct. 19-21; “‘Hate speech’ law invoked against anti-American diatribe” (Canada), Oct. 17-18; “Judge to ‘Sopranos’ suit: fuhgetaboutit“, Sept. 21-23 (& Apr. 6-8); “‘Lawsuit demands AOL stop anti-Islamic chat’“, Sept. 3. 2000: “U.S. Department of Justice vs. Columbus Day?“, Oct. 3; “Punitive damages for hatemongering?” (Wash. Post on Aryan Nations case), Sept. 19; “Australia: antibias laws curb speech” (newspaper’s slighting ethnic references), July 11; “Columnist-fest” (John Rocker case), Jan. 18; “Watch your speech in Laguna Beach“, Jan. 13-14. 1999: “Most unsettling thing we’ve heard about Canada in a while” (hate speech laws), Dec. 17-19; “Speech police go after opinion articles, editorial cartoons“, Aug. 28-29; “Hate-crime laws: why they aren’t liberal“, Aug. 9.

Intellectual property, 2003: “He’s gotta have it” (Spike Lee v. Spike TV), Jun. 16-17; “Hiker cuts off use of his name“, Jun. 4-6. 2002: “Macaulay on copyright law“, Oct. 14; “‘Judge Throws Out “Harry Potter” Copyright Suit’“, Oct. 7-8; “How sharper than a serpent’s tooth it is/To have a precociously musical child” (singer James Brown sued by daughters), Sept. 20-22; “Skittish at Kinko’s” (won’t make copies of customer’s own published writing), Jul. 26-28; “Stolen silence?” (John Cage composition), Jul. 19-21; “Law blogs“, Jul. 3-9; “‘Top ten new copyright crimes’” (satire), Jun. 3-4; “‘A fence too far’” (Hollings bill), May 20-21; “ReplayTV copyright fight“, May 6; “A DMCA run-in” (linking to copyright violation), Apr. 16-17; “Intel Corp. versus yoga foundation“, Apr. 1-2; “Web speech roundup“, Mar. 25-26; “British Telecom claims to own hyperlinks“, Feb. 13-14 (& Oct. 1-2); “Overlawyered film sets“, Feb. 8-10; “‘”Let’s Roll” Trademark Battle Is On’“, Feb. 4-5 (& Feb. 11-12); “‘Aborigines claim kangaroo copyright’“, Feb. 1-3. 2001: “Radio daze“, Aug. 31-Sept. 2; “Barney’s bluster“, June 25 (& “Welcome Slashdot readers“, July 5); “Mich. lawyer’s demand: get my case off your website” (“Love Your Neighbor”, M-LAW, Overlawyered.com), June 20; “Value of being able to endure parody without calling in lawyers: priceless” (MasterCard), April 25; “Patenting the Web?“, April 3-4; “Scientologists vs. Slashdot“, Mar. 19-20. 2000: “Web-copyright update: ‘Dialectizer’ back up, ‘MS-Monopoly’ down“, Aug. 16-17; “‘Dialectizer shut down’“, May 18-21; “More assertions of link liability” (DVD hack), Dec. 31, 1999-Jan. 2, 2000. 1999: “Hey, what is this place, anyway?” (Pez Co. claims right to restrict use of word “Pez”), Oct. 16-17; “Copyright and conscience” (goodbye to “Dysfunctional Family Circus”), Oct. 7 (& see main IP section on tech law page).

Lawsuits intimidate expression, 2003: “McDonald’s sues food critic” (Italy), Jun. 16-17. 2002: “PetsWarehouse.com defamation suit, cont’d” (linking, metatags), May 22-23 (& May 27, 2002, Oct. 4-6, 2002, Aug. 6, 2001); “Defend yourself in print and we’ll sue” (Nike issue ads), May 3 (& Feb. 13-14); “Web speech roundup“, Mar. 25-26. 2001: “Gary to Gannett: pay up for that investigative reporting“, March 30-April 1; “Scientologists vs. Slashdot“, March 19-20; “‘Persistent suitor’” (criticism of academic journals’ publisher), Feb. 6. 2000: “Hauling commentators to court“, Dec. 1; “Degrees of intimidation” (book on “diploma mills”, Apr. 28-30; “Terminix vs. consumer critic’s website“, Mar. 31-April 2; “Costs of veggie-libel laws“, Mar. 20. 1999: “Feds: dissent on smoking = racketeering“, Sept. 23.

Bans on web content not “accessible” to disabled: see special section on disabled rights page.

Blaming media for violence, 2002: “Updates” (Jenny Jones case), Oct. 25-27; “‘Addictive’ computer game blamed for suicide“, Apr. 3-4 (& letter to the editor, Apr. 11). 2001: “Blame video games, again” (WTC terrorism), Sept. 24; “Put the blame on games” (Columbine), April 24, 2001 (& see March 6, 2002: judge dismisses case); “Judge throws out Hollywood- violence suit” (Oliver Stone, Natural Born Killers), March 13-14. 2000: “Hollywood under fire: nose of the Camel?“, Sept. 19; “‘Violent media is good for kids’“, Sept. 13-14; “Shoot-’em-ups: hand over your files“, June 19; “Judge dismisses suit blaming entertainment business for school shootings“, April 13. 1999: “Down the censorship-by-lawsuit road“, Oct. 12; “‘Bringing art to court’“, Sept. 9; “Censorship via (novel) lawsuit” (media companies sued after school shootings), July 22.

Harassment law: “‘Lawsuit demands AOL stop anti-Islamic chat’“, Sept. 3, 2001; “EEOC: unfiltered computers ‘harass’ librarians“, June 4, 2001; “Harassment-law roundup” (pin-ups, bar owner case), May 4, 2000; “The scarlet %+#?*^)&!“, March 7; “Recommended reading” (Roland White in London Times on chill to office banter), Jan. 25, 2000; “Suppression of conversation vs. improvement of conversation“, Nov. 12, 1999 (excerpts from Joan Kennedy Taylor book); “‘Personally agree with’ harassment policy — or you’re out the door“, Sept. 22; “EEOC encourages anonymous harassment complaints“, Sept. 3, 1999; and see separate page on harassment law.

Those dangerous emails: “Cartoonist’s suit over practical joke“, Oct. 26-28, 2001 (& letter to the editor, Nov. 29); “Big fish devour the little?” (listserv defamation, aquatic plants case), Aug. 6, 2001; “Harassment-law roundup” (email-shredding software), Feb. 19-21, 2000; “Emails that ended 20 Times careers“, Feb. 8-9, 2000; “Hold your e-tongue” (emails “can kill you in a courtroom”), Nov. 9, 1999; “Please — there are terminals present” (Bloomberg email system censors bad words), July 30; “‘Destroy privacy expectations’: lawyer” (tell workers their email and hard drives are open to company inspection), July 26, 1999; and see separate page on harassment law.

Web liability issues, 2002: “AVweb capitulates to defamation suit“, Sept. 16-17 (& Sept. 18-19); “PetsWarehouse.com defamation suit, cont’d” (linking, metatags), May 22-23 (& Oct. 4-6); “A DMCA run-in” (linking to copyright violation), Apr. 16-17; “Web speech roundup“, Mar. 25-26; “Columnist-fest” (N.Y. Times v. Tasini), Feb. 11-12; “Web defamation roundup“, Jan. 18-20. 2001: “Words as property: ‘entrepreneur’” (domain name dispute), Nov. 1; “University official vs. web anonymity“, Oct. 30; “‘Lawsuit demands AOL stop anti-Islamic chat’“, Sept. 3; “Anonymity takes a D.C. hit” (Italy licenses web publishers), May 21; “Scientologists vs. Slashdot“, March 19-20. 2000: “Yahoo pulls message board“, Oct. 18; “‘Regulating Privacy: At What Cost?’” (Swedish privacy laws), Sept. 20; “Web-copyright update: ‘Dialectizer’ back up, ‘MS-Monopoly’ down“, Aug. 16-17; “Dangers of linking“, June 7; “Illegal to talk about drugs?“, May 30; “‘Dialectizer shut down’“, May 18-21; “eBay yanks e-meter auctions” (copyright claim), May 3; “Terminix vs. consumer critic’s website” (metatags), March 31-April 2; “More assertions of link liability” (DVD hack), Dec. 31-Jan. 2. 1999: “Link your way to liability?” (professor sues over “course critique” website), Nov. 15 (& update Oct. 10, 2000); “We ourselves use ‘sue’” (competitors’ names used as metatags), Sept. 25-26; “Don’t link or I’ll sue” (“deep linking” suits), Aug. 13 (& update April 5, 2000: court rules deep linking not violation). Plus: our 404 message; & see data collection, disabled online access issues, and high-tech law generally.

Other media/performance accessibility issues, 2002: “11th Circuit reinstates ‘Millionaire’ lawsuit” (suit against “Millionaire” TV show over telephone-based screening), Jun. 21-23 (& Mar. 24-26, June 12, June 19, Nov. 7, 2000; Nov. 5, 2001). 2001: “‘Panel backs deaf patron’s claim against club’” (interpreter demand at comedy club), March 9-11. 2000: “Seats in all parts” (theaters), Dec. 29, 2000-Jan. 2, 2001; “Movie caption trial begins” (assistive devices aid concert bootleggers), Aug. 1; “Complaint: recreated slave ship not handicap accessible“, July 21-23; “Preferred seating” (theaters), April 25-26; “Newest disabled right: audio TV captioning“, March 22; “‘Deaf group files suit against movie theaters’” (closed captioning demand), Feb. 19-21; “The fine print” (sue Boston Globe for reducing type size?), Feb. 17.

Surveillance: “Collateral damage in Drug War” (identity of book buyer), Apr. 28-30, 2000; “Chat into the microphone, please” (SEC plan to trawl Web), Apr. 11; “The booths have ears” (restaurant conversations spied on in U.K.), Apr. 5; “The bold cosmetologists of law enforcement“, Mar. 29; “Your hairdresser — and informant?“, Mar. 16, 2000; “EEOC encourages anonymous harassment complaints“, Sept. 3, 1999.

Defamation, 2003: “Around the blogs” (N.Y. Times brass), Jun. 18-19. 2002: “PetsWarehouse.com defamation suit, cont’d“, May 22-23; “Web speech roundup“, Mar. 25-26; “Web defamation roundup“, Jan. 18-20; “The talk of Laconia“, Jan. 2-3. 2001: “Attorney can sue for being called ‘fixer’“, Dec. 5-6; “University official vs. web anonymity“, Oct. 30; “Disparaging stadium nickname leads to suit“, Jul. 5 (& update Aug. 29-30: company drops suit); “Patenting the Web?” (TechSearch v. Intel defamation suit), Apr. 3-4. 2000: “Toronto coach: Ich kann nicht anders” (had to file defamation suit), Apr. 25-26 (& update May 4, case dropped); “Great moments in defamation law” (armed robber sues own lawyer for mistakenly calling him heroin instead of crack abuser), Apr. 14-16.

Advertising, 2003: “Clear Channel = Deep Pocket” (advertising as nexus of liability in nightclub fire?, Mar. 10-11. 2002: “Lawsuit threats vs. campaign speech“, Oct. 4-6 (& May 18-21, 2000); “Defend yourself in print and we’ll sue” (Nike issue ads), May 3 (& Feb. 13-14); “Norway toy-ad crackdown” (sexism), Apr. 23-24; “‘FTC Taking “Seriously” Request to Probe Firearms Sites’” (unlawful to recommend guns for family security?), Jan. 16-17. 2001: “Radio daze“, Aug. 31-Sept. 2; “Ghost blurber case“, June 12; “Old-hairstyle photo prompts lawsuit“, June 1-3; “Junk-fax bonanza“, March 27 (& March 3-5, 2000, Oct. 22, 1999). 2000: “Web-advertisers’ apocalypse?“, Apr. 20. 1999: “Free expression, with truth in advertising thrown in?” (lawyer’s Jolly Roger flag dispute), Dec. 31; “Feds: dissent on smoking = racketeering“, Sept. 23, 1999 (and see lawyers’ advertising page).

TV, 2003: “He’s gotta have it” (Spike Lee v. Spike TV), Jun. 16-17; “Jailhouse rock” (VH1), Mar. 10-11; “‘Jack Ass blasts “Jackass”‘“, Jan. 3-6. 2002: “Updates” (Jenny Jones case), Oct. 25-27; “‘Demand for more ugly people on TV’” (Norway: higher “ugly quotas” sought), Oct. 21; “Lawsuit threats vs. campaign speech“, Oct. 4-6; “11th Circuit reinstates ‘Millionaire’ lawsuit” (suit over show’s telephone-based screening), Jun. 21-23 (& Mar. 24-26, June 12, June 19, Nov. 7, 2000; Nov. 5, 2001); “Soap star: ABC wrote my character out of the show“, Apr. 10. 2001: “Suing ‘The Sopranos’“, Apr. 6-8 (& Jul. 12-14, 2002: case dropped); “‘Survivor’ contestant sues“, Feb. 7-8. 2000: “Behind ‘Boston Public’“, Nov. 21; “Palm Beach County ‘Under Control’” (suit against network for erroneous election-eve projection), Nov. 16; “Why the bad guys can’t stand John Stossel“, Aug. 18-20; “Won’t pay for set repairs” (Orkin ad leads viewers to throw objects at their TVs), May 30; “Thomas the Tank Engine, derailed” (show’s email contact with young fans), May 25; “Sock puppet lawsuit” (“Late Show with Conan O’Brien” writer), Apr. 27; “Who wants to sue for a million?” (suit against game show for lack of disabled access), Mar. 24-26 (& update Jun. 12); “Newest disabled right: audio TV captioning“, Mar. 22; “Letterman sign suit“, Mar. 17-19. 1999: “The fateful T-shirt” (Leno show giveaway suit), Dec. 7.

“A judge bans a book” (incitement to tax evasion), Jun. 18-19, 2003.

“Hiker cuts off use of his name“, Jun. 4-6, 2003.

“Start that movie on time, or else“, Feb. 20, 2003 (& Jan. 10).

“Fair housing law vs. free speech“, Jan. 31-Feb. 2, 2003.

“Campaign regulation vs. free speech“, May 18-21, 2000 (& Oct. 4-6, 2002).

“‘Greek net cafes face ruin’” (ban on computer games), Sept. 23, 2002.

“Penthouse sued on behalf of disappointed Kournikova-oglers“, Jun. 3-4, 2002.

“Privacy claim by Bourbon Street celebrant“, Sept. 28-30, 2001 (& Mar. 6, 2002, Apr. 15, 2002).

“Radio daze” (Clear Channel hardball), Aug. 31-Sept. 2, 2001.

“The document-shredding facility at Pooh Corner” (Disney dispute with rights holders), Aug. 24-26, 2001.

“‘Internet Usage Records Accessible Under FOI Laws’” (schools case), Nov. 14, 2000.

“Collateral damage in Drug War” (customer records of Denver’s Tattered Cover bookstore subpoenaed), April 28-30, 2000 (update, Oct. 27-29: judge orders records handed over); “‘Power lawyers may sue for reparations’” (sue textbook makers over representation of blacks?), Oct. 25, 2000; “Baleful blurbs” (book publishers sued over errors in cover copy), Nov. 16, 1999.

“Illegal to talk about drugs?“, May 30, 2000.

“Dusting ’em off” (laws against profanity in public), May 18-21, 2000.

“Thought for the day” (Posner on censorship), April 25-26, 2000.

“Verdict on Consumer Reports: false, but not damaging“, April 10, 2000; “Costly state of higher awareness” (libel suit, author Deepak Chopra), March 9, 2000.

“Mormon actress sues over profanity” (says Univ. of Utah theater dept. insisted she utter foul language in scripts), Jan. 24, 2000.

“FCC as Don Corleone“, Oct. 5-6, 1999.

“The shame of the ACLU” (Aguilar v. Avis: ACLU intervenes on anti- free-speech side), Sept. 7, 1999.

“Weekend reading” (tabloid law), Aug. 7-8, 1999.

Articles by Overlawyered.com editor Walter Olson:

“The Law on Trial“, Wall Street Journal, October 14, 1997 (review of Beyond all Reason by Daniel Farber and Suzanna Sherry).

“Shut Up, They Explained” (“zero-tolerance” harassment policies), Reason, June 1997.

“Judge Dread” (on Robert Bork, Slouching Toward Gomorrah), Reason, April 1997.

Filed under: ACLU, advertising, Australia, Bill McClellan, broadcasters, Chrysler, Clear Channel, copyright, Dallas, deep pocket, Denver, fair housing, free speech, Italy, John Stossel, libel slander and defamation, Madison County, music and musicians, newspapers, Norway, online speech, reparations, Sweden, trademarks, Utah

Archived technology law items, pre-July 2003

[intellectual property, patent, copyright and trademark cases]

[Microsoft legal woes]

Web liability issues, 2002: “‘Google sued over search ratings’“, Nov. 6; “AVweb capitulates to defamation suit“, Sept. 16-17 (& Sept. 18-19); “Defying the link-banners“, Aug. 22; “PetsWarehouse.com defamation suit, cont’d” (linking, metatags), May 22-23 (& May 27, 2002, Aug. 6, 2001); “A DMCA run-in” (linking to copyright violation), Apr. 16-17; “Web speech roundup“, Mar. 25-26; “Columnist-fest” (N.Y. Times v. Tasini), Feb. 11-12; “Web defamation roundup“, Jan. 18-20. 2001: “KPMG” (company thinks it can prohibit linking to its site), Dec. 11; “Words as property: ‘entrepreneur’” (domain name dispute), Nov. 1; “University official vs. web anonymity“, Oct. 30; “Domain-name disputes are busting out all over“, June 29-July 1; “Anonymity takes a D.C. hit” (Italy licenses web publishers), May 21; “Scientologists vs. Slashdot“, March 19-20. 2000: “Yahoo pulls message board“, Oct. 18; “‘Regulating Privacy: At What Cost?’” (Swedish privacy laws), Sept. 20; “Web-copyright update: ‘Dialectizer’ back up, ‘MS-Monopoly’ down“, Aug. 16-17; “Dangers of linking“, June 7; “Illegal to talk about drugs?“, May 30; “‘Dialectizer shut down’“, May 18-21; “eBay yanks e-meter auctions” (copyright claim), May 3; “Terminix vs. consumer critic’s website” (metatags), Mar. 31-Apr. 2; “More assertions of link liability” (DVD hack), Dec. 31-Jan. 2. 1999: “Link your way to liability?” (professor sues over “course critique” website), Nov. 15 (& update Oct. 10, 2000); “We ourselves use ‘sue’” (competitors’ names used as metatags), Sept. 25-26; “‘Don’t link or I’ll sue’” (“deep linking” suits), Aug. 13 (& update April 5, 2000: court rules deep linking not violation). Plus: our 404 message; & see data collection, disabled access issues.

Website accessibility: “‘Judge: Disabilities act doesn’t cover Web“, Oct. 22, 2002; “Website accessibility law hits the U.K.” (Scotland), May 7, 2001; “Olympics website’s accessibility complaint“, Aug. 16-17, 2000; “Disabled accessibility for campaign websites: the gotcha game“, July 19-20; “Welcome readers” (Intellectual Capital), June 19; “ADA & the web: sounding the alarm“, May 24; “Access excess“, May 2; “ADA & freedom of expression on the Web“, Feb. 10-11; editor’s testimony before House Judiciary Committee, Feb. 9, 2000; “Accessible websites no snap“, Dec. 21, 1999; “AOL sued for failure to accommodate blind users“, Nov. 5, 1999.

Toshiba settlement, bug and glitch liability, 2002: “7,000 missing colors, many of them crisply green“, Aug. 29. 2001: “Update: Compaq beats glitch suit“, May 11-13; “‘Lawyers to Get $4.7 Million in Suit Against Iomega’” (zip drive defect allegations), May 8. 2000: “‘Laptop lawsuit: Toshiba, feds settle’“, Oct. 25; “In praise of bugs“, May 1; “Silicon siege” (CNet report), April 7-9. 1999: “Toshiba and Ford, in the same boat“, Dec. 2; “Don’t redeem that coupon!“, Nov. 24-25; “Class actions vs. high-tech“, Nov. 23; “How I hit the class action jackpot” (Stuart Taylor, Jr.), Nov. 17; “More details on Toshiba“, Nov. 5-7; “Toshiba flops over“, Nov. 3.

Email and liability: “Employers liable for not filtering raunchy spam?“, Apr. 10-13, 2003; “Big fish devour the little?” (listserv defamation, aquatic plants case), Aug. 6, 2001; “E-privacy invasion made simple“, Feb. 14-15, 2001; “Watch those fwds” (subpoenas of bulletin board postings; Dow Chemical fires employees for email use), Aug. 21-22, 2000; “Hold your e-tongue” (emails “can kill you in a courtroom”), Nov. 9, 1999; “Please — there are terminals present” (Bloomberg email system censors bad words), Jul. 30; “‘Destroy privacy expectations’: lawyer” (tell workers their email and hard drives are open to company inspection), Jul. 26, 1999.

Data collection, privacy issues, 2001: “Vast new surveillance powers for state AGs?” (Carnivore), Sept. 25-26, 2001; “Brace for data-disaster suits“, May 29; “Anonymity takes a D.C. hit“, May 21; “Update: cookie lawsuit crumbles“, May 9. 2000: “‘Internet Usage Records Accessible Under FOI Laws’“, Nov. 14; “‘Regulating Privacy: At What Cost?’“, Sept. 20; “Feds’ own cookie-pushing“, July 5; “Insurers fret over online privacy suits“, May 26-29; “Thomas the Tank Engine, derailed” (COPPA children’s privacy law), May 25; “Web-advertisers’ apocalypse?“, April 20; “Chat into the microphone, please” (SEC plans automated trawling of bulletin boards for stock-hyping comments), April 11; “Silicon siege” (Yahoo), April 7-9; “Another S&W thing” (state AGs vs. DoubleClick), March 27; “Yahoo stalked me!” (privacy suits), March 2; “Cookies, dunked” (DoubleClick), Feb. 2.

Home office regulation?: “OSHA & telecommuters: the long view“, April 7-9, 2000; “Update: OSHA in full retreat on home office issue“, Jan. 29-30; “OSHA at-home worker directive“, Jan. 8-9; “OSHA backs off on home-office regulation“, Jan. 6; “Beyond parody: ‘OSHA Covers At-Home Workers’“, Jan. 5, 2000.

Y2K: “Y2K roundup: poor things!” (much less litigation than expected), Jan. 21-23, 2000; “Litigation Bug Bites Into Democracy“, Jan. 13-14, 2000; “Y, oh Y2K?” (“sue and labor” insurance claims), Sept. 16, 1999 (& see updates Dec. 26-28, 2000 and Nov. 2-4, 2001: courts tend to rule against such claims).

Other Overlawyered.com commentaries:

“Intel sued in notorious county“, Aug. 30-Sept. 2, 2002.

“Sic ’em on Segway“, Aug. 1, 2002; “Segway, the super-wheelchair and the FDA“, Dec. 12, 2001.

“‘Every Man a Cyber Crook’“, Feb. 6-7, 2002.

“Draconian hacker penalties?“, Sept. 28-30, 2001.

“‘Lawsuit demands AOL stop anti-Islamic chat’“, Sept. 3, 2001; “EEOC: unfiltered computers ‘harass’ librarians“, June 4, 2001.

“Dotcom wreckage: sue ’em all“, Aug. 7-8, 2001.

“Brace for data-disaster suits” (hacker attacks, viruses), May 29, 2001; “Suing Nike for getting hacked“, July 12, 2000; “Deep pockets blameable for denial-of-service attacks?“, Feb. 26-27; “Antitrust obstacles to hacker defense“, Feb. 10-11, 2000.

“Anonymity takes a D.C. hit“, May 21, 2001.

“Techies fear Calif. anti-confidentiality bill“, May 15, 2001.

“Internet service disclaimers“, Dec. 13-14, 2000.

“‘Stock Options: A Gold Mine for Racial-Discrimination Suits?’“, Dec. 11-12, 2000; “Feds’ mission: target Silicon Valley for race complaints“, Feb. 29, 2000.

Labor law: “Digital serfs?“, Jan. 26-28, 2001; “Goodbye to gaming volunteers?“, Sept. 12, 2000 (& update Oct. 3); “Why rush that software project, anyway?” (California overtime law), March 29; “Microsoft temps can sue for stock options“, Jan. 11, 2000 (& see Feb. 17; letters, Dec. 20); “‘Click here to sue!’” (AOL volunteer suit), Sept. 7, 1999; “Click here to sue!” (employee misclassification suits), Aug. 19, 1999.

“Tax software verdict: pick a number” (Mississippi verdict; government contracting), Sept. 5, 2000.

“Class-action assault on eBay“, July 13, 2000 (update Nov. 22-23; class action certified).

“‘Parody of animal rights site told to close’“, July 3-4, 2000 (& Aug. 29-30, 2001).

“A Harvard call for selective rain” (some Internet regulation, not too much), July 3-4, 2000.

“AOL ‘pop-up’ class action” (ads said to be unfair), June 27, 2000.

“Harassment-law roundup” (Internet startups vulnerable), May 4, 2000; “Dot-coms as perfect defendants” (sex harassment suits), Jan. 17; “Harassment-law roundup” (Juno cases), Feb. 19-21, 2000..

“Silicon siege” (Ebay antitrust investigation, other cases; T.J. Rodgers warns against rapprochement with Washington), April 7-9, 2000.

“Terminix vs. consumer critic’s website“, March 31-April 2, 2000.

“Music stores sue Sony” (objecting to company-store hyperlinks included with CDs), Feb. 25, 2000.

“Silicon siege” (AOL 5.0 upgrade), April 7-9, 2000; “AOL upgrade’s sharp elbows“, Feb. 12-13, 2000.

“Green cards gather moss” (immigration delays), Feb. 4, 2000.

“Santa came late” (Toys-R-Us e-tailing shortfalls), Jan. 19, 2000; “Beware of market crashes” (online brokerages “probably” liable for computer outages), Nov. 26-28, 1999.

“Your fortune awaits in Internet law” (cybersquatting), Jan. 13-14, 2000; “Time to rent a clue” (domain name disputes), July 28, 1999.

“Rolling the dice, cont’d” (suits over online gambling), Dec. 7, 1999 (earlier report, Aug. 26).

“Mounties vs. your dish” (Canadian satellite law), Nov. 1, 1999.

“Founders’ view of encryption“, Oct. 29, 1999.

“In Houston, expensive menus” (junk faxes class action), Oct. 22, 1999 (update April 3, 2000: claims thrown out).

“Foam-rubber cow recall” (Gateway Corp. premium), Oct. 22, 1999.

“Feds: dissent on smoking = racketeering” (suit deems website advocacy unlawful), Sept. 23, 1999.

“Effects of shareholder-suit reform“, Sept. 22, 1999.

“Our award-winning errors” (this site’s 404 message), Aug. 14-15, 1999.

“Weekend reading” (word counts on litigators’ briefs), Aug. 7-8, 1999.

“Censorship via (novel) lawsuits” (lawyers blame school shootings on video games, Internet sites), July 22, 1999.

“Thought for the day” (Cravath’s Robert Joffe on foreign companies’ unwillingness to let American law govern contracts), July 11, 1999.

Filed under: animal rights, antitrust, Canada, copyright, deep pocket, eBay, Houston, Italy, libel slander and defamation, Mississippi, Sweden, technology, trademarks