- Debate on medical malpractice between Ted Frank (Manhattan Institute) and Shirley Svorny (Cato Institute) [PoL]
- Lawyers, accountants have done well from litigation-ridden Pearlman Ponzi aftermath [Orlando Sentinel]
- Book drop “inherently dangerous”, says rape victim’s family suing library designers [Florida, LISNews]
- “The iTunes Class Action Lawsuit You’ll Never Hear About”[NJLRA] “Jackson v. Unocal – Class Actions Find a Welcome Home in Colorado” [Karlsgodt]
- Another tot accused of sexual harassment, this time a first grader [Boston Herald, earlier (six year old’s “assault”)]
- Profile of lawyer who defends fair use of clips for documentary makers [ABA Journal]
Posts Tagged ‘harassment law’
November 8 roundup
- Washington Post pundit Dana Milbank’s lament: Obama isn’t doing enough to intimidate opponents [David Boaz, Cato]
- FDA defends itself against rising criticism on drug and device approval [NYT] NYT approaches the issue with a curious slant [Paul Rubin]
- California courts: what makes you think we need to follow SCOTUS on arbitration? [Cal Biz Lit, more, Russell Jackson] Senate anti-arbitration hearing could have used more truth in advertising [PoL]
- Pols want to fast-track favored L.A. stadium against environmental suits under California’s obstructor-friendly CEQA. Hmmm… why not fast-track everyone else too? [Gideon Kanner, Stephen Smith, SCPR, Paul Taylor, Examiner]
- State law forbids use of deadly force in defense of business property: “Burglar’s family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit” [Colorado Springs Gazette]
- One reason the Ninth Circuit may go off on more frolics: three-judge, one-clerk bench memos [Kerr]
Welcome Lars Larson listeners
I joined the radio host yesterday evening to talk about how sexual harassment law works in practice, in light of the reports that presidential candidate Herman Cain was a target in two employee actions alleging “inappropriate” conduct. More on the “hostile environment” branch of harassment law here.
July 18 roundup
- Per New Jersey court, overly sedentary home office job can result in valid worker’s comp claim [Courier-Post, NJLRA]
- Trial bar’s AAJ denies it played “direct” role in backing “Hot Coffee” [WaPo, some background]
- “Cop repeatedly harasses waitresses, never disciplined. Feds defend their civil rights by . . . suing the restaurant.” [Palm Beach Post via Radley Balko]
- On “unauthorized practice of law” as protective moat around profession’s interests, Britain does things differently [Gillian Hadfield via Andrew Sullivan; related, Larry Ribstein] Forthcoming book by Robert Crandall et al urges lawyer deregulation [Brookings]
- “The Treaty Clause Doesn’t Give Congress Unlimited Power” [Ilya Shapiro, Cato on Golan v. Holder case headed to Supreme Court]
- The small bank regulatory shakedown blues [Kevin Funnell] Why is the Department of Justice including gag orders as part of its enforcement decrees against banks on race and lending? [Investors Business Daily via PoL] “Emigrant fights back against mortgage-discrimination suits” [Fisher, Forbes] Dodd-Frank squeezing out community banks [Funnell]
- “North Carolina to Seize Speeding Cars That Fail to Pull Over” [The Newspaper] “With what, a tractor beam?” [James Taranto]
July 7 roundup
- Correct result, yet potential for mischief in latest SCOTUS climate ruling [Ilya Shapiro/Cato, my earlier take]
- Wouldn’t even want to guess: how the Howard Stern show handles sexual harassment training [Hyman]
- Philadelphia: $21 million award against emergency room handling noncompliant patient [Kennerly]
- Antitrust assault on Google seems geared to protect competitors more than consumers [Josh Wright]
- “They knew there was a risk!” Curb your indignation please [Coyote]
- Theme issue of Reason magazine on failures of criminal justice system is now online;
- “Why Your New Car Doesn’t Have a Spare Tire” [Sam Kazman, WSJ]
Dershowitz on DSK case
Cynical? Even more so than usual? The Harvard lawprof lays out a theory that ex-IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn and his accuser share an interest in cooperating to foil prosecutor Cy Vance [Newsweek]
Behind a Yale fraternity’s suspension
Federal regulators and private complainants step up pressure for tougher university disciplinary action against offensive males — and speech-related offenses will be very much under scrutiny. [Greg Lukianoff/Daily Caller, Harvey Silverglate and Kyle Smeallie/Minding the Campus, Caroline May/Daily Caller]
More: The Yale Alumni Magazine notes that DKE (Delta Kappa Epsilon) brought the University “bad publicity.” And Dave Zincavage has been blogging critically about the affair. Further: Scott Greenfield.
Yale adopts submissive posture in Title-IX-vs.-speech case
A fraternity has already apologized for its role in loutish public expressions, but that isn’t nearly enough for some complainants who’ve initiated an investigation by the Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights that puts Yale at risk of losing its $500 million in federal funding if it isn’t sufficiently cooperative. Peter Berkowitz in the Wall Street Journal:
That Yale finds itself under pressure from the government, in the face of stupid frat-boy initiation rituals obviously designed to humiliate the pledges themselves, dramatizes how far government and higher education have drifted from the principles of freedom. … What is really at stake in the current investigation of Yale is the proper mission of the university. The complainants, not a few university administrators and faculty, and powerful forces at work in the Department of Education seem to think that one of a university’s top priorities is policing students’ opinions and utterances to ensure that they adopt government-approved ideas about sexual relations. That priority can’t be reconciled with the imperatives of a liberal education.
If a letter just sent to alumni by Yale President Richard Levin is any indication, the university may not intend to put up much of a public stand on behalf of its autonomy of governance, the toleration granted even some offensive utterances in a community of unbridled expression, or the importance of due process for students accused of wrongdoing. Indeed, Levin’s letter does not make even the tamest and most tentative attempt to argue that anything about the OCR complaint is legally erroneous or worth resisting. The full text of the letter follows: Read On…
New Massachusetts restraining-order law
A new Massachusetts law that went into effect last year allows neighbors and other unrelated complainants to seek restraining orders against each other, a legal remedy formerly confined mostly to use between family members. But there’s been a surge of filings seeking the new “harassment prevention orders,” and according to the clerk of the Boston municipal court, the law has wound up empowering “every kook in the world” to “file a harassment order against their neighbor or landlord or someone who just annoys them.” Among cases: “One man took his neighbor to Malden District Court for allegedly blowing leaves on his property, and a woman in Boston Municipal Court insisted that actor Chuck Norris used high frequency radio transmissions to harass her at home.” [Boston Globe]
A right to pursue harassment complaints anonymously?
Scott Greenfield thinks some legal academics may stand in need of a civil liberties refresher course.