Plaintiffs’ attorneys “across the nation have begun to target the alcoholic beverage industry.” The press coverage largely ignores the issue of consumer choice and personal responsibility. (Richard Willing, USA Today, May 13; Steve Raabe, “Alcohol lawsuits target ads”, Denver Post, May 12).
Posts Tagged ‘Denver’
Insurer on hook for $150K for $8K chiropractor bill
In May 1995, Dawn Goodson’s car was rear-ended by a car insured by American Standard. Fourteen months later, in July 1996, Goodson and her children spent $8,000 on a chiropractor. Goodson submitted an insurance claim three months later.
You might imagine a wee bit of skepticism on the part of the insurance company. Goodson hadn’t gone through American Standard’s PPO, which meant that the bills were higher than they would have been; moreover, American Standard was skeptical that a chiropractor’s 1996 treatment for three individuals was medically necessary as a result of the 1995 accident, and asked for an independent medical evaluation. Nevertheless, American Standard, after initially offering to pay part of the bill, eventually paid the full medical bills in April 1998.
Not good enough: Goodson sued three months later, seeking damages for “emotional distress.” A jury awarded $75,000, and doubled it with $75,000 of punitive damages. The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed Monday, holding that the eighteen-month delay in full payment was grounds for recovery of non-economic damages. You can guess what the eventual consequence will be for Colorado insurance rates now that an insurer is potentially subject to penalties of over 2000% for questioning a claim, but the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association paints it as a victory for the consumers who will now have to pay for the meritless claims insurers will pay out of fear of lawsuit. (Howard Pankratz, “Court says tardy insurers liable for emotional damages without proof of loss”, Denver Post, May 4; Karen Abbott, “Insurer is ordered to pay family $300,000”, Rocky Mountain News, May 4; Goodson v. American Standard Insurance Company of Wisconsin opinion).
“BBB pulls ad after flak from attorney groups”
The Denver and Colorado bar associations have succeeded in getting the local Better Business Bureau to yank from the airwaves a 15-second ad premised on the notion that there might actually be some attorneys out there who exploit their clients. “You inherited a fortune … You hired a lawyer … Now it’s his fortune,” the announcer says in the ad. Declaring the ad offensive, the bar associations demanded a hearing before the BBB’s own unfair-advertising panel. Jean Herman, president and chief executive of the Denver/Boulder BBB, agreed to pull the ad, saying, “I don’t agree with them … but I don’t want to go around ticking people off”. Ad spots warning about bad plumbers, mortgage lenders and limousine drivers will continue as usual in the BBB’s “Check With Us First” campaign. Interestingly, Greg Martin, deputy executive director of both bar groups, said the groups would not agree to a suggestion that the offending line be amended from “You hired a lawyer” to “You hired the wrong lawyer.” “Obviously, our goal was not to have that ad on TV anymore,” Martin said. (John Accola, Rocky Mountain News, Mar. 13). David Giacalone (Mar. 16) has an excellent analysis. Of course, it remains perfectly normal and acceptable for lawyers’ own ads to promote the idea that other people’s professions and businesses are injurious and not always aboveboard.
Be sure to check out the last few sentences of the Rocky Mountain News article, in which Martin, the bar official, blasts the whole idea of applying to lawyers the BBB approach of documenting a record of complaints so that consumers can see for themselves which operators have numerous unresolved grievances outstanding. Martin says the BBB lacks any “special knowledge about attorneys” and says the profession is already highly regulated by its own (with emphasis, as we might add, on its own) disciplinary committees. Now suppose that some other profession or industry — medicine, say — were to assert that its mysteries are so esoteric, and its success in self-regulation so complete, that lay observers should not presume even to compare notes with each other on their bad experiences with it. Hard to imagine, these days, isn’t it?
Auto insurance won’t cover rape
Updating our story of Mar. 27-28, 2002: the Colorado Supreme Court by a 4-3 margin has reversed lower court decisions that ordered State Farm to pay auto insurance benefits to a woman who was kidnapped and raped in her car. (Sean Kelly, Denver Post, Oct. 15). Plus: Curmudgeonly Clerk has more (Oct. 18).
Secondhand smoke vs. firsthand contraband
One of the larger costs from the lack of tort reform is not so much the damages awards to undeserving plaintiffs or the fees that plaintiffs’ lawyers extract or the cost of hiring lawyers to defend, but the social costs imposed when decisions are made to avoid the risk of litigation: playgrounds shut down, bans on cold weather swimming (“Don’t be so wet”, The Economist, Oct. 2 (subscription required)).
The repercussions have been particularly severe in Colorado, where a fear of secondhand smoking suits caused the prison system there, where the vast majority of the 18,000 prisoners incarcerated are smokers, to ban tobacco. The result? An immediate creation of a black market with markups for tobacco far exceeding that for cocaine, and the expected associated violence and corruption that goes along with a widespread black market in prison. Eighteen guards, teachers, and supervisors have been prosecuted in three years, and a prisoner newsletter calls the tobacco contraband law “a retirement assistance program for correctional officers.” (Kirk Mitchell, “Ban turns tobacco into prison prize”, Denver Post, Oct. 13).
Welcome Phila., Denver, Okla., Jacksonville readers
We’re named among the weekly “Web Winners” picks of Philadelphia Inquirer columnist Reid Kanaley, who recommends us for “such class-action gems as the one in California demanding discounts for men on ‘ladies night.'” (Aug. 14). Vincent Carroll, writing in Denver’s Rocky Mountain News, predicts that the forthcoming Kobe Bryant trial is unlikely to resemble the atrocious O.J. Simpson trial, and quotes our editor on the question of jury selection and its abuse (“Spectacle of O.J. trial won’t repeat itself here”, Aug. 16).
Perhaps we can help choose
“The federal courts are running out of money to pay jurors…. With a growing caseload and longer trials draining the judiciary’s budget, the agency that runs the courts urged judges early this week to defer ‘noncritical civil trials’ until October, when its new fiscal year begins.” The suggestion was not welcomed in some quarters. “I don’t think there is such a thing as a noncritical jury trial,” said Judge John L. Kane of the Federal District Court in Denver. “If someone has a right to a civil trial, the Seventh Amendment guarantees them a right to a jury.” The Judicial Conference of the United States “later backtracked,” cancelling its request to defer trials in hopes that Congress would allocate additional money or OK the payment of jury fees from a $10 million emergency fund. (Adam Liptak, “Federal Judges Find Courts Short of Money to Pay Jurors,” N.Y. Times, Aug. 1).
Essay on loser-pays
The following essay was written circa 1999 by our editor and formerly appeared on the site’s topical page on loser-pays.
* * *
America differs from all other Western democracies (indeed, from virtually all nations of any sort) in its refusal to recognize the principle that the losing side in litigation should contribute toward “making whole” its prevailing opponent. It’s long past time this country joined the world in adopting that principle; unfortunately, any steps toward doing so must contend with deeply entrenched resistance from the organized bar, which likes the system the way it is.
Overlawyered.com‘s editor wrote an account in Reason, June 1995, aimed at explaining how loser-pays works in practice and dispelling some of the more common misconceptions about the device. He also testified before Congress when the issue came up that year as part of the “Contract with America”. Not online, unfortunately, are most of the relevant sections from The Litigation Explosion, which argues at length for the loser-pays idea, especially chapter 15, “Strict Liability for Lawyering”.
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. Archived aviation items, pre-July 2003“NTSB blames pilot error, but airport told to pay $10 million“, May 14, 2003. “‘Sisters suing Southwest over “racist rhyme”‘“, Feb. 11, 2003. Forum-shopping: “Mass disasters belong in federal court“, Dec. 18-19, 2002; “Crash lawyers like Boeing move” (Chicago, new HQ city, has higher verdicts), May 17, 2001; “Come to America and sue” (Concorde forum-shopping), Jan. 19-21, 2001; “French crash, German victims, American payout levels?“, Sept. 29-Oct. 1, 2000. “Lawyer’s suit against airline: my seatmate was too fat“, Aug. 2-4, 2002; “‘Sorry, Slimbo, you’re in my seats’“, June 7, 2001 (& updates Dec. 15-16, 2001, Oct. 25-27, 2002); “Obese fliers“, Dec. 20, 2000. “Annals of zero tolerance: ‘No scissors allowed at ribbon-cutting ceremony at Pittsburgh airport’“, Sept. 23, 2002. “‘Airline sued for $5 million over lost cat’“, Sept. 3-4, 2002. “Flowers, perfume in airline cabins not OK?” (Canada), May 17-19, 2002. World Trade Center, 2002: “Roger Parloff on 9/11 fund“, Apr. 1-2. 2001: “Liability limits speed WTC recovery“, Nov. 21-22; “‘Company tried to capitalize on Sept. 11’“, Oct. 15; “‘Despite Protection, Airlines Face Lawsuits for Millions in Damages’“, Sept. 24 (& Oct. 10-11); “‘Lawsuits From Attacks Likely to Be in the Billions’“, Sept. 21-23; “Washington Post on airline liability“, Sept. 19-20; “What you knew was coming“, Sept. 14-16 (& coverage generally after Sept. 11). “Couldn’t order 7-Up in French” (suing Air Canada for $525,000), Mar. 18, 2002. “Disclaimer rage?” (GPS software), Oct. 15, 2001. “‘Man Thought He Was Dead, Sues Airline’” (left sleeping in darkened cabin), Oct. 10-11, 2001. “‘Poor work tolerated, employees say’“, Nov. 15, 2001; “The high cost of cultural passivity“, Sept. 21-23; “Self-defense for flight crews“, Sept. 13; “Transsexual passenger’s airline hassle“, Sept. 12, 2001. White-knuckle lotto: “‘Delta passenger wins $1.25 mln for landing trauma’“, Aug. 24-26, 2001; “All shook up” (jury says emotional scars from Little Rock crash worth $6.5 million), Oct. 19, 2000; “White-knuckle lotto“, Oct. 8, 1999. Letter to the editor, Sept. 3, 2001 (ABC vs. Parker-Hannifin); “Big numbers” (Teledyne Continental Motors $27 million settlement), April 16, 2001; “Getting around small-aircraft lawsuit reform“, Jan. 29, 2001. “‘Airline restricts children flying alone’“, Aug. 6, 2001. “‘Lawyers pay price for cruel hoaxes’“, Aug. 3, 2001; “‘The love children of Flight 261’“, April 10, 2001; “After an air crash, many Latin ‘survivors’” (Alaska Air claimants), Nov. 29, 2000. “Needed: assumption of risk” (first-time skydiver), July 27-29, 2001; “‘Skydivers don’t sue’“, May 26, 2000 (update July 6: Canadian diver prevails in suit against teammate) (& see Apr. 16, 2001). “Getting around small-aircraft lawsuit reform“, Jan. 29, 2001. “‘Economy-class syndrome’ class action” (Australia), Dec. 13-14, 2000. “All shook up” (jury says emotional scars from Little Rock crash worth $6.5 million), Oct. 18, 2000; “Diva awarded $11M for broken dream” (opera student injured in runway crash), Aug. 31, 2000. “John Denver crash” (also Air France, Northwest, aviation need for tort reform), Oct. 4, 2000. “Prosecution fears slow crash probes“, Sept. 6-7, 2000. “Retroactive crash liability” (Death on the High Seas Act), Aug. 25-27, 2000. “Class actions: are we all litigants yet?” (American Airlines frequent flier class action), Aug. 23-24, 2000. “Never too stale a claim” (suits against manufacturers over planes built in early 20th century), July 14-16, 2000. “New subpage” (this page introduced), June 16-18, 2000. “Somebody to sue” (map publisher Jeppesen Sanderson sued after Croatia crash), June 1, 2000. “Swissair crash aftermath” (Peggy’s Cove disaster in U.S. courts), March 14, 2000; “Montreal Gazette ‘Lawsuit of the Year’” (bagpipers sue Swissair for lost income), Jan. 17, 2000. “Blaming good pilots” (Alaska Air crash), Feb. 24, 2000. “New safety rule likely to increase death toll” (FAA and child seating on airlines), Dec. 31, 1999-Jan. 2, 2000. “Attorney blames airline for passenger’s drunken in-flight rage“, Dec. 9, 1999. “Indications of turbulence” (pilot whose mental fitness for duty was challenged wins partial back pay), Dec. 1, 1999. “Some lawyers try to make nice” (EgyptAir 990), Nov. 29, 1999. “From the planet Litigation” (UFO suits), Nov. 22, 1999. “Grounds for suspicion” (DEA and arriving passengers), Oct. 9-10, 1999. “Overlawyered skies not always safer“, July 19, 1999. |
|
Other resources: AVweb includes articles by its law columnist, Phillip J. Kolczynski, on such topics as product liability, liability for homebuilt aircraft, and aircraft owner liability. Walter Olson, “Kingdom of the One-Eyed” (pilot vision and ADA), Reason, July 1998. Walter Olson, “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of a Good Beer” (alcoholic pilot and ADA), Washington Monthly, September 1997. |