|
Overlawyered.com commentaries: “Texas’s giant legal reform“, Jun. 18-19, 2003.
“To tame Madison County, pass the Class Action Fairness Act“, Jun. 12-15, 2003; “‘Reforming class action suits’” (Class Action Fairness Act), Apr. 25-27, 2003.
“Judge kicks class-action lawyers off case” (H&R Block), May 15, 2003.
“Class action lawyer takes $20 million from defendant’s side“, Mar. 15-16, 2003.
“FBI probes Philadelphia’s hiring of class action firm“, Jan. 31-Feb. 2, 2003.
“Ninth Circuit panel sniffs collusion in bias settlement fees“, Dec. 16-17, 2002.
Auctions: “Third Circuit cuts class action fees“, Sept. 25-26, 2001; “Letter to the editor” (competitive bidding for class representation), Jun. 13, 2001 (& Oct. 1-2, 2002).
“7,000 missing colors, many of them crisply green“, Aug. 29, 2002.
“‘Junk-fax’ suit demands $2 trillion“, Aug. 26, 2002; “Junk-fax litigation: blood in the water“, July 24, 2001; “Junk-fax bonanza“, March 27, 2001; “Junk fax litigation, continued“, March 3-5, 2000; “In Houston, expensive menus” (unsolicited faxes), Oct. 22, 1999.
“Penthouse sued on behalf of disappointed Kournikova-oglers“, Jun. 3-4, 2002.
“The mystery of the transgenic corn“, May 14-15, 2002.
“Editorial-fest“, Mar. 11, 2002; “Washington Post on class action reform” (good editorial), Aug. 29-30, 2001; “Actions without class” (Washington Post editorial), Dec. 2, 1999.
“The thrill of it all: plaintiffs win 28 cent coupon“, Feb. 27-28, 2002.
“‘Toyota buyers’ suit yields cash — for lawyers’“, Feb. 18-19, 2002; “Golf ball class action” (Acushnet Co.), Nov. 18-19, 1999; “Class action coupon clippers” (Washington Post on settlement abuses), Nov. 15, 1999.
“‘Congress looks to change class action system’“, Feb. 11-12, 2002; “‘They’re making a federal case out of it … in state court’“, Nov. 7-8, 2001.
“Selling out the class?” (allegations of collusive settlement in H&R Block case), April 5, 2001 (& see Dec. 3).
“Swiss banks vindicated“, Nov. 1, 2001.
Letter to the editor (lawyers’ own incremental billing disclosed?), Oct. 22, 2001 (& see Dec. 3).
“Counterterrorism bill footnote” (forum shopping), Oct. 16, 2001; “Best little forum-shopping in Texas” (class actions make their way to Texarkana), August 27, 1999.
“Employment class actions: EEOC to the rescue“, Sept. 10, 2001.
“220 percent rate of farmer participation” (USDA black farmer settlement), July 25, 2001.
“The rest of Justice O’Connor’s speech“, July 6-8, 2001.
“Blockbuster Video class action“, June 11, 2001 (& see July 3-4 (Vince Carroll column)).
“Letter to the editor” (First USA credit cards), June 13, 2001; “Bank error in your favor” (credit card holders), Sept. 27-28, 2000; & letter to the editor, Sept. 3, 2001.
“Ghost blurber case“, June 12, 2001.
“NFL satellite ticket class action“, June 5, 2001 (& update Aug. 20-21: court disallows settlement).
“Insurance class settlement scuttled“, Feb. 26, 2001.
“Florida lawyers’ day jobs, cont’d” (hotbed of class action filing), Dec. 11-12, 2000; “Florida’s legal talent, before the Chad War” (Florida Marlins ticketholders), Dec. 8-10, 2000.
“Obese soldiers class action“, Nov. 10-12, 2000.
“Sweepstakes, for sure” (American Family Publishers), Oct. 20-22, 2000; “Update: Publishers’ Clearing House case“, Feb. 29, 2000.
“Courtroom crusade on drug prices?“, Oct. 19, 2000.
“Class actions: are we all litigants yet?“, Aug. 23-24, 2000.
Coke: “Class-action lawyers to Coke clients: you’re fired“, July 21-23, 2000; “‘Coke plaintiff eavesdrops on lawyers; case unravels’” (what do lawyers tell each other after they think their clients have hung up on the conference call?), July 19-20; “‘Ad deal links Coke, lawyer in suit’” (Willie Gary, suing Coke, cuts lucrative ad deal with it), May 11, 2000.
“Target Detroit” (lawyers countersue DaimlerChrysler and exec personally), July 19-20, 2000; “Turning the tables” (DaimlerChrysler sues class action lawyers), Nov. 12, 1999.
“Class-action assault on eBay“, July 13, 2000.
“AOL ‘pop-up’ class action” (ads said to be unfair), June 27, 2000.
“Rise, fall, and rise of class actions” (enormous increase in filing rates in past decade), Mar. 10-12, 2000.
“Criticizing lawyers proves hazardous” (columnist Bill McClellan makes fun of class-action attorneys, they sue him for libel), Nov. 4, 1999 (update Nov. 30: he criticizes them again, though suit is still pending); “Update: Publishers’ Clearing House case” (judge approves settlement including legal fee request; agreement reached to end libel suit), Feb. 29, 2000.
“Secrets of class action defense“, Feb. 25, 2000; “Mobile Register probes class action biz” (BancBoston and other mortgage escrow cases), Feb. 7, 2000.
“AOL upgrade’s sharp elbows“, Feb. 12-13, 2000.
“Weekend reading: columnist-fest” (Laura Pulfer on suit against Ralph Lauren outlet stores; Alex Cockburn on Swiss banks), Feb. 5-6, 2000.
“From our mail sack: unclear on the concept“, Jan. 28, 2000.
“Santa came late” (suit against Toys-R-Us for missing Christmas delivery), Jan. 19, 2000.
“Pokemon litigation roundup“, Jan. 10, 2000; “Pokemon cards update“, Oct. 13, 1999; “Pokemon-card class actions“, Oct. 1-3, 1999
“Expert witnesses and their ghostwriters” (life insurance class actions), Jan. 4, 2000.
“Lawyers for famine and wilderness-busting?” (anti-biotech), Jan. 3, 1999.
“Class action toy story” (antitrust), Dec. 29-30, 1999.
“‘In race to sue Microsoft, some trip’” (lawyers inadvertently copy details of pleadings in earlier cases), Dec. 23-26, 1999.
“Rolling the dice, cont’d” (suits over online gambling), Dec. 7, 1999 (earlier report, Aug. 26).
“Beware of market crashes” (class action sought against E*Trade for alleged computer-related trading losses), Nov. 26-28, 1999.
“Are they kidding, or not-kidding?” (proposals for suits against makers of fattening foods, losing sports teams), Nov. 15, 1999.
“Public by 2-1 margin disapproves of tobacco suits” (if class actions are filed on behalf of the public, why don’t they reflect public opinion?), Nov. 5-7, 1999.
“Demolition derby for consumer budgets” (class action against State Farm over generic crash parts), Oct. 8, 1999.
“Power attracts power” (Boies joins anti-HMO effort), Sept. 30, 1999; “Impending assault on HMOs“, Sept. 30.
“$49 million lawyers’ fee okayed in case where clients got nothing” (secondhand smoke action), Sept. 28, 1999; “Personal responsibility takes a vacation in Miami” (tobacco class-action verdict), Jul. 8, 1999.
“Judge throws out four WWII reparations lawsuits“, Sept. 20, 1999.
“Tainted cycle” (Milwaukee taxpayers sue themselves), Sept. 2, 1999.
“Three insurers sued for $100 million” (how the press covers class action announcements), Aug. 20, 1999.
Resources on class actions are found at many different places on Overlawyered.com. For example, most of the massive lawsuits filed against individual industries over personal injury to classes of consumers are covered on pages specific to the subject matter of the cases, such as the pages on firearms litigation, tobacco litigation, managed-care litigation, breast implant litigation, product liability, and so forth.
This page assembles resources on class actions as a procedural device and as an institution. Among topics covered are the unique role in this area of an “entrepreneurial” plaintiff’s bar that decides on its own behalf who and how to sue and lines up clients as needed; the history of the device and the reasons why it is either sharply limited or virtually unknown in the courts of other industrial democracies; the distinctive ethical problems that arise because of the extreme difficulty of policing lawyers’ faithfulness to the interests of the absent class; and the operations of the class action “industry” in the areas in which it has been a familiar part of the American legal landscape for decades, namely shareholder litigation and class actions over consumer and antitrust grievances aggregating large numbers of (usually smallish) claims.
Background — procedural history, ethical issues:
Overlawyered.com‘s editor wrote about class actions (as well as “champerty and maintenance”, the “invisible-fist theory”, and other topics) in Chapter 3 of his book The Litigation Explosion; an excerpt is online.
Chapter 5 (“The New Town Meeting”) of Peter Huber’s book Liability: The Legal Revolution and Its Consequences contains a valuable discussion of the class action format, particularly as it applies to the so-called toxic tort; it is unfortunately not online.
Lawrence Schonbrun, a Northern California attorney who has developed a specialty in filing challenges to excessive class action attorneys’ fee requests, wrote a prescient article in 1996 on “coupon deals”, “separately negotiated” fees from defendants, and other innovative ways the class action bar was finding to escape scrutiny of its remuneration. (“Class Actions: The New Ethical Frontier“)
Shareholder litigation:
A starting point for research on this topic is Stanford Law School’s comprehensive Securities Class Action Clearinghouse. See also the commentaries on this site.
In Felzen v. Andreas (1998), Judge Frank Easterbrook of the Seventh Circuit wrote that “Many thoughtful students of the subject conclude, with empirical support, that derivative actions do little to promote sound management and often hurt the firm by diverting the managers’ time from running the business while diverting the firm’s resources to the plaintiffs’ lawyers without providing a corresponding benefit.” He cited a long list of scholarly articles including Janet Cooper Alexander, Do the Merits Matter? A Study of Settlements in Securities Class Actions, 43 Stanford L. Rev. 497 (1991), which found that the “structural characteristics common to securities class actions . . . combine to produce outcomes that are not a function of the substantive merits of the case.” and Roberta Romano, The Shareholder Suit: Litigation without Foundation?, 7 J. L. Econ. & Organization 55 (1991), which examined 39 shareholder suits filed between the late 1960s and 1987 and concluded that “shareholder litigation is a weak, if not ineffective, instrument of corporate governance.”
In 1995 Congress passed the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, which aimed to rectify some of the worst abuses in the field. This client memo from Fried, Frank describes the wider powers institutional investors obtained under the act to influence litigation going on purportedly in the name of investors such as themselves.
In Polar International Brokerage v. Reeve, a New York federal judge rejected a proposed class action settlement and request for $200,000 in attorneys’ fees, saying it offered shareholders “nothing of real value”. (Deborah Pines, National Law Journal, May 24, 1999).
Although the securities bar frequently alleges that well-known companies in Silicon Valley and elsewhere are run by crooked managements that fleece their shareholders, they ironically turn out to keep a lot of their (very substantial) stock holdings invested in the very same companies. (Paul Elias, San Francisco Recorder, June 8, 1999). Among the reasons is that in many cases they have accepted stock as payment for dropping earlier legal actions.
Other class action resources:
The Federalist Society publishes a Class Action Watch newsletter. The first issue is in conventional web-page format. The second issue is a PDF document (Adobe Acrobat needed to view; get it here).
Among the better-known law firms representing class action plaintiffs are Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein LLP, Cohen Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, Krause & Kalfayan, and Barrack, Rodos & Bacine.
Actuary Jack Patterson has written an account for a plaintiff’s lawyer readership of class actions against life insurance companies, one of the big practice areas of the 1990s.
The class action bar also files many antitrust suits on behalf of large groups of consumers or business purchasers. The Antitrust Policy web site collects many worthwhile resources on antitrust law.
Filed under: antitrust, Bill Lerach, Bill McClellan, champerty, Chrysler, class actions, copyright, Detroit, forum shopping, Houston, libel slander and defamation, Madison County, Melvyn Weiss, Milberg Weiss, Philadelphia, reparations, State Farm, Switzerland, The Litigation Explosion, tobacco, Toyota, Willie Gary
“Gun lawsuit columns“, Apr. 25-27, 2003; “Gun lawsuit preemption moves forward“, Apr. 4-6; “Gun-suit thoughts“, Mar. 31, 2003; “House bill would cut off municipal gun suits“, May 9, 2002.
NAACP suits: “Update” (jury votes against liability), Jun. 2, 2003; “Gun lawsuit columns“, Apr. 25-27; “Gun-suit thoughts“, Mar. 31; “Stalking horse for anti-gun litigators“, Mar. 24, 2003; “NAACP’s ‘ludicrous’ anti-gun suit” (David Horowitz in Salon), Aug. 19, 1999; “Not-so-Kool omen for NAACP suit” (racial claims fail in tobacco case), Nov. 1, 1999; “Connecticut, sue thyself” (NAACP official, while state official, subsidized gunmaking), Dec. 2, 1999. Also see letters to the editor, “NAACP lawsuits take bad aim“, Detroit Free Press, Jul. 20, 1999 (& see update Jul. 30, 2003: judge dismisses lawsuit).
“More notices for The Rule of Lawyers” (NRA’s LaPierre praises book), Mar. 21-23, 2003 (& Apr. 25-27).
“Manufacturer sued after bullet fails to take down lion“, Apr. 25-27, 2003.
“Florida school shooting: the deep pockets did it” (Grunow), Dec. 13-15, 2002 (& update Feb. 4-5).
“Spitzer riding high” (New York attorney general), Jun. 17-18, 2002.
Municipal cases crash and burn, 2002: “‘Gunning for manufacturers through courts’” (Boston drops its case), Apr. 29-30; “Third Circuit nixes Philly gun suits“, Jan. 28-29. 2001: “Municipal gun suits on the run” (Camden, Atlanta, Bridgeport’s Ganim), Nov. 19-20; “Victory (again) in Connecticut” (Bridgeport), Oct. 3-4 (& Dec. 11-12, 1999); “‘New York State’s Gun Suit Must Be Dismissed’“, Aug. 22-23; “Columnist-fest” (Jacob Sullum), June 22-24; “Victory in Albany” (Miami, New Orleans, etc.), April 27-29. 2000: “Victory in Philadelphia“, Dec. 22-25; “Victory in Chicago“, Sept. 20; “‘City gun suit shot down on appeal’” (Cincinnati), Aug. 16-17 (& Oct. 8, 1999). 1999: “Victory in Florida” (Miami), Dec. 14 (& Nov. 20-21).
“‘Gunning for manufacturers through courts’” (proposed NYC ordinance), Apr. 29-30, 2002.
Commentaries by others, 2002: “Columnist-fest” (Dave Kopel, Jacob Sullum), Mar. 18. 2001: “Municipal gun suits on the run” (Peter Schuck, Kimberley Strassel), Nov. 19-20; “Columnist-fest” (Sullum), June 22-24; “City gun suits: ‘extortion parading as law’” (Robert Levy), May 14. 2000: “Tobacco- and gun-suit reading” (Michael Krauss), Aug. 21-22; “Steady aim” (Vince Carroll, Sam Smith), May 12; “Columnist-fest” (Sullum), May 2; “Stuart Taylor, Jr., on Smith & Wesson deal“, April 11; “Blatant end-runs around the democratic process” (Robert Reich), Jan. 15-16. 1999: “Weekend reading: evergreens” (Bruce Kobayashi), Oct. 23-24; “Arbitrary confiscation, from Pskov to Pascagoula” (Michael Barone), July 24-25; “Guns, tobacco, and others to come” (Peter Huber), July 20; “‘Anti-democratic, wrong, a feel-good solution‘” (editorials), July 3.
“Under the Christmas tree” (BB guns, toy soldiers), Dec. 21-23, 2001 (& see Feb. 11-12, 2002).
“State of prosecution in Iowa” (bullet possession), Jan. 28-29, 2002.
“‘FTC Taking “Seriously” Request to Probe Firearms Sites’” (unlawful to recommend guns for family security?), Jan. 16-17, 2002.
“‘North America’s most dangerous mammal’” (deer), Nov. 29, 2001.
“Gun controllers on the defensive“, Nov. 6, 2001.
“‘Shooting range sued over suicide’“, Sept. 27, 2001; “$3 million verdict for selling gun used in suicide“, Sept. 17, 2001; “‘Suicide-Attempt Survivor Sues’” (department that issued cop his gun), Jan. 24-25, 2001.
“The high cost of cultural passivity“, Sept. 21-23, 2001; “Self-defense for flight crews“, Sept. 13, 2001.
“Self-defense: an American tradition” (Bellesiles furor), Sept. 12, 2001.
“Navegar not nailed“, Aug. 15, 2001; “Victory in California” (Navegar), Aug. 7-8, 2001; “Weekend reading: evergreens” (Bruce Kobayashi), Oct. 23-24, 1999.
“Victory in Albany” (Hamilton v. Accu-Tek), April 27-29, 2001.
“Letter to the editor” (activist doctors vs. gun ownership), May 18, 2001.
“Non-gun control” (toy guns; bottles and glasses), March 23-25.
“$3 million verdict for selling gun used in suicide“, Sept. 17, 2001; “Vicarious criminal liability?” (individual who sold gun prosecuted after remote purchaser used it to commit murder), Dec. 8-10, 2000.
“Promising areas for suits” (suits against families after firearms injuries), Dec. 7, 2000.
“‘Gunshot wounds down almost 40 percent’“, Oct. 10, 2000.
“For Philly, gun lawsuits just the beginning” (city intends to sue other businesses), Oct. 5, 2000.
Effects on gunmakers: “Victory in Chicago” (dealers under pressure as liability insurance dries up), Sept. 20, 2000; “One gunmaker’s story” (Freedom Arms), June 14-15; “Gun-buying rush“, Jan. 4, 2000; “Victory in Florida” (lawyers using cost infliction as tactic), Dec. 14, 1999; “Gun jihad menaces national security” (small arms industry is important defense supplier), Nov. 9; “Skittish Colt” (not abandoning consumer market, says gunmaker), Nov. 18-19; “Proud history to end?” (Colt’s retreating from consumer handgun business), Oct. 12; Gunmaker bankruptcies: three, and counting“, Sept. 14, 1999.
“Senator Lieberman: a sampler” (opposed firearms lawsuits in D.C. in 1992), Aug. 8-9, 2000; “Veeps ATLA could love” (Durkin, D-Ill., sponsor of gun-suit bill), July 7, 2000.
“Our most ominous export” (U.S. trial lawyers help launch anti-gunmaker suit in Brazil), July 31, 2000.
“‘Poll: majority disapprove of tobacco fine’” (survey finds public against gun suits 67 to 28 percent), July 24-25, 2000.
“Giuliani’s blatant forum-shopping“, June 28, 2000; “…bad news out of New York” (city joins gun suits), June 21, 2000.
“The Wal-Mart docket” (sued over gun sales), July 7, 2000.
Parodies, cartoons: “Animated advocacy” (“smart guns” interactive game, etc.), June 16-18, 2000; “Cartoon that made us laugh” (“….We can’t take those off the market! Dangerous products are a gold mine for the gov’t!”), Jan. 21-23; “Power tools: America’s children at risk” (parody site taken seriously), Dec. 7, 1999.
“Rewarded with the bench” (judicial nomination for Connecticut AG Richard Blumenthal?), June 12, 2000; “Punished for resistance“, March 31-April 2; “Connecticut, sue thyself” (state officials, NAACP), Dec. 2, 1999.
Smith & Wesson settlement: “Victory in Albany” (see notes), April 27-29, 2001; “A Smith & Wesson FAQ“, May 18-21, 2000; “Not with our lives you don’t“, May 9; “Columnist-fest” (Jacob Sullum), May 2; “Police resent political gun-buying influence“, April 14-16; “Stuart Taylor, Jr., on Smith & Wesson deal“, April 11; “Punished for resistance“, March 31-April 2; “Another S&W thing“, March 27; “Social engineering by lawsuit” (Yale law professor Peter Schuck doubts S&W would have lost at trial), March 27; “Smith & Wesson’s ‘voluntary’ capitulation’“, March 21; “Liberty no longer insured by Smith & Wesson“, March 20, 2000.
“Not my fault, II” (19-year-old sues gunmaker, own father over accidental shooting 14 years earlier), May 17, 2000.
“Not with our lives you don’t” (gun-suit issue figures in Presidential race; Clinton, trial lawyers endorse gun control event), May 9, 2000.
Police line-of-duty: “Not with our lives you don’t“, May 9, 2000; “Police resent political gun-buying influence“, April 14-16; “Cops shoot civilian; city blames maker of victim’s gun“, April 12, 2000; “Zone of blame” (policeman’s widow sues maker of his gun), Oct. 27, 1999.
“Barrel pointing backward” (lawsuits and “smart guns”), Feb. 17, 2000; update, March 8.
“Improvements to our gun-litigation page“, Feb. 14, 2000; “Gun litigation roundup“, Feb. 10-11, 2000.
HUD: “Cuomo menaces gun makers: ‘death by a thousand cuts“, Feb. 2, 2000; “Feds’ tobacco hypocrisy: Indian ‘smoke shops’“, Jan. 25, 2000; “Gun lawsuits: White House, HUD pile on“, Dec. 9, 1999.
“Fourth Branch”?: “Steady aim“, May 12, 2000; “Judge to lawyers in Miami gun suit: you’re trying to ban ’em, right?” (anti-democratic quotes from anti-gun side), Nov. 20-21, 1999; “Gun litigation: a helpful brother-in-law” (Hugh Rodham surfaces assisting gun lawyers), Oct. 25, 1999; “Reform stirrings on public contingency fees“, Oct. 15; “Big guns” (origins of municipal litigation), Oct. 5-6; “Like calling the Orkin man to talk about bugs” (American Bar Ass’n president compares gun suits to civil rights crusade), August 10; “‘A de facto fourth branch of government‘” (Wendell Gauthier’s view of trial lawyers’ role), July 4, 1999.
Hypocrisy of municipal plaintiffs: “Do as we say, please” (big cities suing gun makers sell lots of surplus guns themselves), July 14, 1999; “Do as we say (II): gun-suit hypocrisy in Detroit“, August 30, 1999; “Gun-suit hypocrisy, Boston style” (city admits it didn’t follow own procedures in selling guns), August 25, 1999; “Connecticut, sue thyself” (state officials, NAACP), Dec. 2, 1999.
Philanthropies back anti-gun litigation: “Charity dollars support trial lawyers’ gun jihad“, Sept. 2, 1999; “Correction: the difference one letter makes” (YWCA, not YMCA, supports anti-gun efforts), Nov. 10; “Soros as bully” (“Open Society” philanthropist), Nov. 23, 1999.
“Recommended reading” (Lingua Franca on Second Amendment controversy in law schools), Jan. 25, 2000; “‘Scholar’s shift in thinking angers liberals’” (Larry Tribe says Second Amd’t does include individual right), Aug. 30, 1999.
“Fertilizer manufacturers not liable for World Trade Center bombing” (theories against them resembled those used against gunmakers), Aug. 23, 1999.
“‘Settlement bonds’: are guns next?” (Wall Street maneuvering to float bonds based on expropriation of gun industry), Aug. 5, 1999.
“Censorship via (novel) lawsuit” (lawyers suing gunmakers, Hollywood claim their theories are “traditional” and “time-honored”), Jul. 22, 1999.
Related commentary: “zero-tolerance” weapons policies2002: “‘No scissors allowed at ribbon-cutting ceremony at Pittsburgh airport’“, Sept. 23; “Steak knives, finger ‘guns’“, May 16; “Goodbye to zero tolerance?“, Jan. 25-27.
2001: “Under the Christmas tree” (BB guns, toy soldiers), Dec. 21-23; “John Leo on Overlawyered.com“, Aug. 15; “Bagpiper prom garb” (skean dubh knife), June 21; “Drawing pictures of weapons” (also U.K. pellet gun case), May 15; “Zero tolerance spiral” (roundup), April 12; “Non-gun control” (second-graders’ paper gun), March 23-25; “ABA criticizes zero tolerance” (knife cases), Feb. 21-22; “Pointing chicken finger“, Feb. 2-4; “Gun-shaped medallion“, Jan. 18.
2000: “Tweety bird chain” (also African tribal knives case), Sept. 29-Oct. 1 (& update Oct. 4); “Kopel on zero-tolerance policies“, Sept. 25-26; “‘NZ kids get ‘license’ to play with toy guns’“, Sept. 8-10; “Ease up on kids” (Utah), Aug. 4-7; “Annals of zero tolerance” (finger guns, inadvertent steak knife in lunch bag), May 22; “Kindergartners’ ‘bang, you’re dead’“, April 17; “Don’t play James Bond” (fifth grader’s plastic toy gun), March 28; “Annals of zero tolerance: scissors, teacher’s beer“, March 15.
1999: “Weekend reading: columnist-fest” (John Leo column), Dec. 11-12; “Scissors, toy-gun cases“, Dec. 8; “Annals of zero tolerance: the fateful thumb“, Nov. 20-21; “Annals of zero tolerance: more nail clippers cases“, Nov. 10; “Annals of zero tolerance: cannon shots banned” (school disallows yearbook photo posed on artillery), Oct. 30-31 (update Nov. 26-28: school relents); “Zero tolerance strikes again” (student suspended after using knife to cut cake), Oct. 23-24.
——————————————————————————–
Other resources on gun lawsuits:
List (compiled by Prof. Eugene Volokh, UCLA Law School) of law professors skeptical of firearms suits (subcategories: municipal lawsuits, firearms torts generally).
“Suing Gun Makers” (Reason magazine “Breaking Issues” series).
Walter Olson, “Plaintiff’s Lawyers Take Aim at Democracy“, Wall Street Journal, March 21, 2000; “Big Guns“, Reason, Oct. 1999; “Firing Squad” (federalism and gun suits), Reason, May 1999.
National Center for Policy Analysis, “Suing Gun Manufacturers: Hazardous to Our Health“.
American Lawyer on origins of the municipal firearms litigation, June 1999.
American Shooting Sports Coalition, “Gun Rights: Under the Gavel“.
Guncite.com links on firearms litigation
Also see resources on product liability / on personal responsibility
Filed under: Atlanta, attorneys general, bankruptcy, Cincinnati, Connecticut, contingent fee, deep pocket, Detroit, Eliot Spitzer, federalism, guns, Iowa, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, tobacco, Utah, zero tolerance
“‘Prosecutor had ordeal as defendant’“, May 14, 2003.
Sex abuse charges, 2003: “‘Sex, God and Greed’“, May 28; “‘No Crueler Tyrannies’” (Dorothy Rabinowitz), May 8 (& Apr. 17, 2001). 2002: “‘Reno owes the public answers’“, May 7; “Updates” (rape shield laws), Jan. 9-10 (& more on Jovanovic case: Dec. 23-26, 1999). 2001: “Sued if you do dept.: co-worker’s claim of rape“, Nov. 7-8; “‘Teen sex offenders face years of stigma’“, Nov. 5; “‘Crying wolf’“, Oct. 30; “‘Proposed Law Would Consider Alcohol as Date-Rape Drug’” (Wisc.), Oct. 3-4. 2000: “Federal commerce power genuinely limited, Supreme Court rules” (strikes down VAWA’s lawsuit provision), May 16 (and see Wendy Kaminer, Feb. 24); “Updating Jane Austen“, Apr. 28-30; “Court rejects ‘telephone sex slave’ charge“, Apr. 24; “Philadelphia: feminist groups to be consulted on whether to classify incidents as rape“, Mar. 27 (and see Cathy Young, April 6); 1999: “Okay, we admit it: we admire these lawyers” (Wenatchee defenders), Sept. 4-6; “Personal hell“, Jul. 31-Aug. 1.
“Employers liable for not filtering raunchy spam?“, Apr. 10-13, 2003.
Watch those emails: “Employers liable for not filtering raunchy spam?“, Apr. 10-13, 2003; “Why we lose workplace privacy“, Aug. 9, 2001; “Watch those fwds” (Dow Chemical fires employees for email use), Aug. 21-22, 2000; “Oops: D.A.’s and judge’s fwding of sex pics deemed ‘unfortunate event’“, April 11; “Harassment-law roundup” (email-shredding software), Feb. 19-21; “Emails that ended 20 Times careers“, Feb. 8-9, 2000; “Please — there are terminals present” (Bloomberg censors its terminals), July 30, 1999.
“After failed workplace romance, a $1.3 million bill“, Feb. 6-9, 2003.
“Incoherence of sexual harassment law“, Oct. 15, 2002.
Sued either way: “Investigate, but gently“, Sept. 25-26, 2002; “‘Ex-Teach’s Suit: Kids Abused Me’“, Jun. 26-27, 2002; “Sued if you do dept.: co-worker’s claim of rape“, Nov. 7-8, 2001; “EEOC: unfiltered computers ‘harass’ librarians“, Jun. 4, 2001; “Customer offense” (supermarket bagger with Tourette’s), Jun. 9-11, 2000; “Columnist-fest” (Mona Charen on Mar. 10-12 story, below), Apr. 6; “Accused of harassment; wins $2 million from employer“, Mar. 10-12 (& update Jun. 2, 2003: award reversed); “‘Judgment reversed in Seinfeld case’“, Feb. 26-27, 2000; “Employment-law retaliation: real frogs from ‘totally bogus’ gardens“, Sept. 29, 1999.
“Banish those desk photos of spouse at beach“, Aug. 29-Sept. 2, 2002.
“Clipboard-throwing manager = $30 million clipping for grocery chain“, Apr. 19-21, 2002 (& update Jul. 26-28: damages cut to $8 million); “‘$3 million awarded in harassment’” (Illinois police department), Dec. 19, 2001; “Fieger’s firecrackers frequently fizzle” ($20 million harassment verdict against Chrysler), May 31, 2001; “The stuffed-grape-leaf standard” (feminist litigator asserts that $300K isn’t that much money), August 14-15, 1999.
“‘Surgeon halts operation over foreign nurses’ poor English’” (U.K.: he’s then threatened with disciplinary action for racism), Jul. 25, 2002.
“Catharine MacKinnon, call your office“, May 16, 2002.
“An eggshell psyche at U.Va. Law“, Apr. 8-9, 2002.
“Jail for schoolyard taunts?“, Feb. 27-28, 2002; “‘Boy faces jail for slapping girl’s bottom’“, Jan. 5-7, 2001; “Annals of zero tolerance” (six-year-old’s “sexual harassment”), May 22, 2000.
“European workplace notes” (UK: harassment of dyslexic), Feb. 25-26, 2002.
“Firehouse blues” (girly mags, Alaska), Feb. 20-21, 2002.
“‘Woman Wins Verdict, but no Money, Against Seagal’“, Jan. 4-6, 2002.
Office dating, “love contracts”: “Love contracts“, Dec. 10, 2001; “Ask the experts (if that’ll help)“, Oct. 19, 2000; “Ministry of love-discouragement“, May 3; “‘Love contracts’ spreading to U.K.“, Dec. 31, 1999-Jan. 2, 2000; “Weekend reading: evergreens” (“love contract” for office romances), Dec. 3-5, 1999.
“Employee’s right to jubilate over Sept. 11 attack“, Oct. 9, 2001.
“‘Lawsuit demands AOL stop anti-Islamic chat’“, Sept. 3, 2001.
“‘We often turn irresponsibility into legal actions against others’” (Robyn Blumner on U. of South Fla. art student harassment case), Aug. 13-14, 2001.
“Chandra, Monica, and sex-harass law“, July 27-29, 2001.
“Spoof memo draws EEOC probe“, June 26, 2001.
“‘Hearsay harassment’ not actionable“, June 12, 2001.
“EEOC: unfiltered computers ‘harass’ librarians“, June 4, 2001 (& see “Columnist-fest” (Wendy McElroy), June 22-24.
“Mistletoe dangerous even when absent“, April 18, 2001.
“‘2000’s Ten Wackiest Employment Lawsuits’” (too much sex talk in sex shop), April 13-15, 2001.
“Appeals panel: schools’ harassment rule unconstitutional“, Feb. 27, 2001; “Weekend reading” (Supreme Court’s invention of Title IX harassment law), August 21-22, 1999.
Business climate: “Why we lose workplace privacy“, Aug. 9, 2001; “Ask the experts (if that’ll help)“, Oct. 19, 2000; “The scarlet %+#?*^)&!” (companies cut clients loose for profane language), March 7, 2000; “‘Personally agree with’ harassment policy — or you’re out the door“, Sept. 22, 1999; “EEOC encourages anonymous harassment complaints“, Sept. 3, 1999.
Hate speech, hate crime laws: see free speech and media law page.
“Columnist-fest” (Sarah McCarthy on Paula Jones case), Nov. 14, 2000.
“Don’t meet with her alone“, Nov. 1, 2000.
“Ask the experts (if that’ll help)“, Oct. 19, 2000.
“White House pastry chef harassment suit“, Sept. 18, 2000.
“Harassment law roundup” (Confederate flags on employee cars, Jeffrey Rosen book, Avis v. Aguilar, do-as-we-say case), Sept. 11, 2000.
“Embarrassing Lawsuit Hall of Fame” (Mass. agency finds flatulence not harassing), Aug. 14, 2000.
“From the U.K.: watch your language” (college, job bureau restrict use of “lady”, “hardworking”), June 13, 2000.
“Victim of the century?” (principal collects disability benefits for sexual compulsion), June 2-4, 2000; “Doctor sues insurer, claims sex addiction“, Oct. 13, 1999.
“What the French think of American harassment law“, May 25, 2000.
“The four rules of sexual harassment controversies” (Claudia Kennedy case; female-on-male touching case; spanking initiation), May 15, 2000.
“Comment of the day“, May 5-7, 2000; “Recommended reading” (Roland White in London Times on chill to office banter), Jan. 25, 2000.
“Harassment-law roundup” (bathroom graffiti; Boston bar owner’s insensitive decorations; pin-ups and porn in police station), May 4, 2000.
“Book feature: ‘The Kinder, Gentler Military’“, April 3, 2000.
“The shame of the ACLU” (Aguilar v. Avis: ACLU intervenes on anti- free-speech side), Sept. 7, 1999; “Speech police go after opinion articles, editorial cartoons“, August 28-29, 1999.
“Harassment-law roundup” (Internet startups vulnerable), May 4, 2000; “Dot-coms as perfect defendants“, Jan. 17; “Harassment-law roundup” (Juno case), Feb. 19-21, 2000.
“Oops! Didn’t mean nothing by that, ma’am” (“Hello, good looking” directed at harassment trainer), Dec. 21, 1999.
“Suppression of conversation vs. improvement of conversation“, Nov. 12, 1999 (excerpts from Joan Kennedy Taylor book); “Risks of harm“, Nov. 13-14, 1999; “Harassment-law roundup” (Taylor book discussed), Feb. 19-21, 2000.
“Courts actually begin to define ‘harassment’; activists in shock“, August 6, 1999.
“Please — there are terminals present” (South Park on sexual harassment), July 30, 1999.
——————————————————————————–
Articles by Overlawyered.com editor Walter Olson:
“Title IX’s Invisible Ink” (Supreme Court invents right to sue schools over student-on-student harassment), Reason, August/September 1999.
“A Legacy of Dirty Laundry” (brief contribution to symposium on harassment law), The Women’s Quarterly, Winter 1999.
“Have the Harassment Rules Changed?“, Wall Street Journal, April 6, 1998 (judge’s dismissal of Paula Jones lawsuit).
“Punch the Clock, Sue the Boss“, New York Times, March 20, 1998.
“Shut Up, They Explained” (“zero-tolerance”), Reason, June 1997.
“The Long Arm of Harassment Law“, New York Times, July 7, 1996.
?When Sensitivity Training Is the Law? (Connecticut law requires training of managers), Wall Street Journal, January 20, 1993.
In addition, The Excuse Factory (1997) includes two chapters on harassment law, namely chapter 4 (“Fear of Flirting”) and chapter 14 (“Workplace Cleansing”). Neither is online.
|
