By a 51 to 49 percent margin, Texas voters have approved Proposition 12, thus restoring to the legislature the power to set limits on damages in civil lawsuits, which a 1988 Texas Supreme Court opinion had arrogated to the courts alone. See our earlier coverage at Sept. 4, Sept. 6). Proponents of the measure were modestly outspent ($6 million vs. $7 million) by trial lawyers who opposed it. “Lawyers [also] enlisted a wide range of consumer, anti-crime, senior citizen and environmental groups to tap into their membership bases” — to no avail. (Janet Elliott, “Texans pass Prop. 12 in statewide election”, Houston Chronicle, Sept. 14).
Posts Tagged ‘Houston’
Texas tort reform update
The Texas tort reform initiative is unique because it seeks to accomplish reform through constitutional amendment; on some other occasions, plaintiff-friendly judges have struck down state tort-reform measures by claiming that they conflict with state constitutions. Early voting for tomorrow’s election shows larger-than-normal turnout. (Kris Axtman, “Texas vote tests a new tactic to curb jury awards,” Christian Science Monitor, Sep. 12). Lara Squires writes at length in support of Proposition 12 in the Fort Worth Business Press, noting a 400% increase in some insurance costs:
[Dr. John] Durand is an interventional cardiologist with Consultants in Cardiology of Fort Worth. He says that in a three-year period, his 12-physician group?s insurance premiums have gone from $125,000 a year to close to $700,000 a year, despite an impeccable claims history.
?We had been setting aside funds for our practice growth. We were going to build an outpatient congestive heart failure clinic, to meet the needs of a growing population facing this major health problem,? Durand said. ?Instead, we had to cut back on services, freeze hiring of more medical staff and scrap plans for the outpatient center. It?s the first time in 35 years of our practice that we?ve identified a need in the community and haven?t been able to implement the solution.? (Sep. 10).
One unintended consequence of the ballot initiative: a backlog of over a thousand medical malpractice cases filed in Harris County in a three-month stretch in an effort to beat the deadline that would be imposed by the amendment. (AP, “Backlog of malpractice cases results from deadline,” Sep. 11; previous Overlawyered discussion Sep. 6).
SEP. 14 UPDATE: The constitutional amendment passes, 51-49. (Kelly Shannon, “Texans Vote to Limit Lawsuit Awards”, AP, Sep. 14; Janet Elliott, “Texans pass Prop. 12 in statewide election”, Houston Chronicle, Sep. 14; amendment text). (via Bashman)
Class action roundup: lap dances, Register.com, Poland Spring
Houston attorney David George has filed intended class-action lawsuits on behalf of local resident Paul Brian Meekey against three strip clubs, claiming the clubs violated Texas law by adding a $5 credit card surcharge to the $20 price of a lap dance. The suit demands a refund of all such charges paid over the past four years, plus attorney’s fees. According to attorney George, state law flatly forbids merchants from imposing surcharges on credit card transactions, even, presumably, in cases where those transactions are costly for merchants to provide because of a high later dispute rate. “Another lawyer tried filing similar cases in 1999 but abandoned them, in part out of fear that clients would only be angry when they received notice at home about refunds.” (Mary Flood, “Seeking a redress of lap-dance surcharges”, Houston Chronicle, Aug. 31). (Update May 3, 2005: appeals court lets suits proceed).
In other news, Register.com has settled a class action over its supposedly deceptive former practice of initially pointing newly registered domain names to a “Coming Soon” Page which included advertising. Class members will get a $5-off coupon toward future Register.com services, named plaintiff Michael Zurakov will get $12,500, and the lawyers will ask for up to $642,500. Thanks, lawyers! (settlement notice; Ed Foster, The Gripe Line, InfoWorld, Aug. 27; Slashdot thread). And Nestle’s Poland Spring bottled water subsidiary “has negotiated a proposed settlement for a class-action lawsuit alleging that the company’s bottled water does not come from a spring and is not completely safe. … The settlement calls for Poland Spring to offer discounts or free water worth $8,050,000 over the next five years, contribute $2.75 million to charities during the same period and step up its monitoring of water quality. It also would pay the two lawyers involved in that case $1.35 million.” The deal is drawing peals of outrage from lawyers pushing ten similar class actions who are upset that the class was not properly represented — being angry about the possibility of being cut out without fees has absolutely nothing to do with it. “Each of the lawsuits contends that Poland Spring’s water is not actually natural spring water because it is drawn from wells.” (Edward D. Murphy, “Poland Spring makes deal on lawsuit”, Portland Press-Herald, Sept. 3; notice of settlement (PDF)). Update Jun. 25: how much did consumers actually get? Darned if one columnist can find out.
“Trial lawyers staying out of public eye on Prop. 12”
“Leaders of the Texas Trial Lawyers Association, aware of their negative image, made a deliberate decision to stay out of public view on a controversial ballot measure to cap lawsuit damages. … ‘This program that has been put together relies on non-lawyers bringing the message to the public. To make this program work we must vow to not communicate with the public media or in a public forum at all regarding the amendment election. NO LAWYERS — NO EXCEPTIONS,'” read an email describing a TTLA strategy meeting. Willie Chapman. spokesman for the trial lawyer group, “said the TTLA has known for a long time that many people believe trial lawyers have an economic self-interest in battles over lawsuit damages. ‘We know it’s best to have messengers like consumers, clients who have had cases, law professors and legal scholars,’ Chapman said.” “The memo outlines a secret plan to disguise management of the campaign against passage of Proposition 12,” charged Rossanna Salazar, spokeswoman for Yes on 12. (Janet Elliott, Houston Chronicle, Sept. 4). (& welcome Dean Esmay readers; one of the commenters there notes that someone may have forgotten to tell the members of the TTLA that they weren’t supposed to take an identifiable role in fighting the proposition, since a Yellow Pages check on the names of letter-writers blasting the measure in a San Antonio paper reveals a plenitude of them listed under “Attorneys at Law”).
Texas’s Proposition 12
An intense campaign is under way in Texas over Proposition 12, which would amend the state constitution so as to give the Legislature authority to set limits on non-economic damages awarded to plaintiffs in civil lawsuits (vast assemblage of news links via Google News). It is being enthusiastically backed by the state’s medical community: YesOn12.org; Texas Medical Association; Texas Association of Family Physicians. Opposition: Save Texas Courts, TexansAgainstProp12.com, Texas Trial Lawyers Association. Opponents of the measure claim to fear the influence of “Big Money”, but — such a surprise! — have heavily out-fund-raised and out-spent the proposition’s supporters, with at least five law firms kicking in $250,000 each to the Save Texas Courts group (Houston Chronicle, Jul. 17, reprinted at National Constitution Center).
Curmudgeonly Clerk has a thorough roundup (Aug. 26), including the sentiments of major newspapers (the elite ones tend to be opposed, as usual) and weblog pointers. Kill As Few Patients As Possible (Sept. 2) and RangelMD (Aug. 20) also comment.
Remarkably, some opponents of the proposition have now carried out a sort of broad-daylight identity theft against the state’s best-known tort reform organization, Texans for Lawsuit Reform. Observing the domain name TexansforLawsuitReform.com up for grabs, they registered it as their own and put up a site exactly mimicking the actual TLR’s graphics and logo but then filling the rest of the page with boilerplate propaganda against the measure. The Austin Chronicle has more on the story (Lee Nichols, “Naked City”, Aug. 29). Kill as Few also comments (Sept. 4).
Addendum: BeldarBlog (Aug. 28) has an excellent analysis of the division-of-powers angle of Proposition 12 (should tort law remain exclusively the province of judge-made law, or is it legitimate for lawmakers to help shape its course?).
Lawsuit: chemical suppliers, banks should pay Gulf War vets
Houston attorney Gary Pitts has filed a lawsuit in Brooklyn on behalf of veterans of the first U.S.-led war with Iraq “alleging that companies that exported chemicals to Iraq in the 1980s, and the banks that financed those deals, are liable for illnesses the U.S. veterans sustained from exposure to chemical weapons stockpiles that were blown up during the 1991 war.” (Phil Hirschkorn and Deborah Feyerick, “Gulf War veterans sue banks, firms over chemicals”, CNN, Aug. 20; Hartford Courant; Newsday)(& letter to the editor, Sept. 18).
Archived class action materials, pre-July 2003
Madison County, Ill., 2003: “To tame Madison County, pass the Class Action Fairness Act“, Jun. 12-15; “The intimidation tactics of Madison County“, Jun. 9; “‘Lawyers who won $10 bil. verdict had donated to judge’“, Apr. 30; “A bond too far“, Apr. 4-6; “Appeals bonds, again“, Apr. 2-3; “Mad County pays out again” (“light” cigarette class action), Mar. 24. 2002: “Malpractice-crisis latest: let ’em become CPAs“, Oct. 7-8; “Intel sued in notorious county“, Aug. 30-Sept. 2. 2000: “Update: Publishers’ Clearing House case“, Feb. 29. 1999: “Criticizing lawyers proves hazardous” (columnist Bill McClellan makes fun of class-action attorneys, they sue him for libel), Nov. 4 (& Nov. 30; Feb. 29, 2000)
Securities class actions, 2003: “Prospering despite reform“, May 5; “‘Lawyers find gold mine in Phila. pension cases’“, Mar. 21-23; “NYC challenges class action fees; taxpayers save $200 million“, Feb. 28-Mar. 2 (& Jun. 20, 2000). 2002: “Updates” (Ninth Circuit ruling), Oct. 1-2; “Second Circuit: we mean business about stopping frivolous securities suits“, Aug. 29-Sept. 2; “Financial scandals: legislate in haste“, Jul. 12-14; “‘How to stuff a wild Enron’“, Apr. 22; “Judge compares class action lawyers to ‘squeegee boys’“, Apr. 18. 2001: “Short-sellers had right to a drop in stock price“, Nov. 12; “Third Circuit cuts class action fees” (Cendant, CBS/ Westinghouse), Sept. 25-26 (& on Cendant, June 20, Sept. 4, 2000); “Dotcom wreckage: sue ’em all“, Aug. 7-8; “‘2d Circuit Upholds Sanctions Against Firms for Frivolous Securities Claims’” (Schoengold & Sporn), July 23; “Razorfish, Cisco, IPO suits“, May 22; “Securities law: time for loser-pays“, Mar. 2-4; “3Com prevails in shareholder suit“, Feb. 21-22; “$1,000/hour for shareholder class lawyers” (Aetna case), Feb. 14-15; “What they did for lead-plaintiff status?“, Jan. 18 (& see Feb. 21-22). 2000: “Did securities-law reform fail?“, Nov. 10-12; “Emulex fraud: gotta find a defendant“, Sept. 4; “Fortune on Lerach“, Aug. 16-17; “Lion’s share” (commodity brokerage case), May 5-7; “Fee shrinkage“, May 3; “Celera stockholders vent at Milberg Weiss“, Apr. 25-26. 1999: “Piggyback suit not entitled to piggybank contents” (Second Circuit rejects fees in Texaco action), Oct. 9-10; “Effects of shareholder-suit reform“, Sept. 22.
Fee review, 2003: “Vitamin class action: some questions for the lawyers“, May 28; “Sauce for the gander dept.“, May 19; “NYC challenges class action fees; taxpayers save $200 million“, Feb. 28-Mar. 2 (& Jun. 20, 2000). 2002: “FTC cracks down on excessive legal fees“, Oct. 1-2; “Smog fee case: ‘unreal world of greed’“, Jul. 24. 2001: “Court’s chutzpah-award nominee” (Wells Fargo), Oct. 17-18; “Third Circuit cuts class action fees” (Cendant, CBS/ Westinghouse), Sept. 25-26 (& on Cendant, June 20, Sept. 4, 2000); “Coupon settlement? Pay the lawyers in coupons“, Mar. 16-18. 2000: “Fee shrinkage“, May 3; “‘Accord tossed: Class members ‘got nothing’” (Equifax, 7th Circuit), Jan. 6. 1999: “Class action fee control: it’s not just a good idea, it’s the law” (Ninth Circuit on “separately negotiated” fees), Nov. 30; “Piggyback suit not entitled to piggybank contents” (2nd Circuit, Texaco), Oct. 9-10.
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, 2003: “Prospering despite reform“, May 5; “Milberg copyrights its complaints“, Jan. 3-6. 2002: “Updates” (Ninth Circuit ruling), Oct. 1-2; “Smog fee case: ‘unreal world of greed’“, Jul. 24 (& Dec. 5, 2000, Jun. 22-24, 2001); “Judge compares class action lawyers to ‘squeegee boys’“, Apr. 18; “Milberg faces second probe” (Phila. politics), Feb. 27-28; “‘Probe of Milberg Weiss has bar buzzing’“, Jan. 28-29; “‘In a class of his own’” (Melvyn Weiss profiled in The Economist), Jan. 21-22. 2001: “NFL satellite ticket class action“, June 5 (& update Aug. 20-21: court disallows settlement); “Update: cookie lawsuit crumbles“, May 9; “‘Lawyers to Get $4.7 Million in Suit Against Iomega’” (zip drive defect allegations), May 8; “California electricity linkfest” (representing San Francisco), March 26; “(Another) ‘Monster Fee Award for Tobacco Fighters’” (Calif. cities and counties), March 21-22; “3Com prevails in shareholder suit“, Feb. 21-22; “$1,000/hour for shareholder class lawyers” (Aetna case), Feb. 14-15; “What they did for lead-plaintiff status?“, Jan. 18 (& see Feb. 21-22). 2000: “Fortune on Lerach“, Aug. 16-17; “Fee shrinkage“, May 3; “Celera stockholders vent at Milberg Weiss“, Apr. 25-26; “Class-actioneers’ woes“, Mar. 1; “Pokemon litigation roundup“, Jan. 10 (& Oct. 1-3, Oct. 13, 1999).
Toshiba laptop settlement: see separate page on high-tech law.
Microsoft class actions: “Microsoft case and AG contributions“, Apr. 3-4, 2002; “Columnist-fest” (proposed settlement), Nov. 27, 2001; “Hiring talent from the opposing camp“, Feb. 28, 2000; “In race to sue Microsoft, some trip“, Dec. 23-26; “Microsoft roundup“, Dec. 3-5; “‘Actions without class’“, Dec. 2; “Class actions vs. high-tech“, Nov. 23; “Vice President gets an earful“, Nov. 22; “Microsoft roundup“, Nov. 17; “Fins circle in water“, Nov. 13-14; “Microsoft roundup“, Nov. 11; “Microsoft ruling: guest editorials“, Nov. 8; “Why doesn’t Windows cost more?“, Oct. 27; “Are you sure you want to delete ‘Microsoft’?“, Oct. 11.
Employment class actions: see separate page on employment law.
|
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. Archived technology law items, pre-July 2003[intellectual property, patent, copyright and trademark cases] 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. 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. |
|
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. Archived legal ethics items, pre-July 2003Bar discipline and client protection, 2003: “Probate’s misplaced trust” (Washington Post series), Jun. 16-17. 2002: “Crumbs from the table“, Feb. 8-10. 2001: “Law firm sued over fen-phen settlement practices“, Dec. 28; “Updates” (IOLTA), Dec. 15-16 (& Jan. 31); “Holiday special” (Canadian lawyer’s misconduct), May 28; “Mills of legal discipline” (updates on Brock, Hager, Fieger cases), Mar. 3; “Dangers of complaining about lawyers” (Ga. considers easing defamation counter-complaints by lawyers), Mar. 30-Apr. 1. 2000: “‘Judge Lenient With Perjurer, Cites Clinton Case’“, Oct. 16-17 (& May 16); “Disbarred, with an asterisk” (Mass. has let many attorneys resume practice), Sept. 20; “Funds that don’t protect” (client protection funds), Aug. 23-24; “Fit to practice?” (California bar disciplinary board), Aug. 21-22; “That Hager case” (American U. law professor Mark Hager, settlement of Warner-Lambert Nix lice treatment case), Feb. 23 (& update May 3, 2001: board recommends three-year suspension). “New legal ethics weblog” (ethicalEsq.?), Jun. 6-8, 2003. “Class action lawyer takes $20 million from defendant’s side“, Mar. 15-16, 2003. “Politico’s law associate suspended over ‘runner’ use” (Louisiana), Feb. 14-16, 2003. “Race-bias cases gone wrong“, Jan. 24-26, 2003. “Lawyers fret about bad image” (Fla. bar plans to rate and monitor tone of journalists’ coverage), Oct. 3, 2002. “FTC cracks down on excessive legal fees“, Oct. 1-2, 2002. “Second Circuit: we mean business about stopping frivolous securities suits” (scope of Rule 11), Aug. 29-Sept. 2, 2002. “Lawyer’s 44-hour workday“, Jun. 28-30, 2002; “Charged $16,000 for brief he copied from book“, May 17-19, 2002; “Lending rules trip up litigation-finance firms“, Dec. 3, 2001; Letter to the editor (incremental billing disclosed?), Oct. 22, 2001; “Law-firm bill-padding? Say it isn’t so!“, Nov. 18, 1999. “‘Student gets diploma after threatening lawsuit’“, Jun. 13, 2002. Truth value, 2002: “Lying’s not nice, especially when representing the bar“, Jul. 30-31; “Columbia Law School survey on public attitude toward lawyers“, Apr. 26-28; “‘Ex-student sentenced for rape lie’” (wants to become attorney), Jan. 11-13 (& see May 26-29, 2000: Stephen Glass graduates Georgetown Law). 2001: Criminal defense attorneys, doing what they do best“, Dec. 15-16; “‘Lawyers pay price for cruel hoaxes’” (phony heir claims after plane crashes), Aug. 3-5; “‘Lie-tery winners’“, April 20-22. 2000: “What was the Florida court thinking?” (Boies-submitted affidavit), Dec. 11-12; “‘Judge Lenient With Perjurer, Cites Clinton Case’“, Oct. 16-17 (& May 16); “The judge wasn’t asleep” (sanctions for submission of dubious affidavits), June 14-15. 1999: “If true, then all the better” (excerpt from Campos, Jurismania), Dec. 3-5; and see witness coaching, below. “‘”Little” done for firm, Rendell says’” (law firms provide no-show jobs for politicians), May 9, 2002. “‘Former clients sue attorney O’Quinn’” (Kennedy Heights case), Apr. 8-9, 2002 (& Aug. 4, 1999). “Gary & Co. shenanigans at Maris trial“, Apr. 1-2, 2002. “Lawyers stage sham trial aimed at inculpating third party“, Mar. 22-24, 2002. Disclosure: “Lending rules trip up litigation-finance firms“, Dec. 3, 2001; Letter to the editor (incremental billing disclosed?), Oct. 22, 2001; “Trial lawyers knew of tire failures, didn’t inform safety regulators“, June 25 (& June 28)(& letter to the editor, July 6); Letter to the editor (ghostwriting), June 13; “ABA’s toothless ethics proposals“, Jan. 17, 2001; “Contingency fee reform“, Nov. 1, 2000. Witness coaching, 2001: “GAF sues asbestos lawyers“, Feb. 12-13, 2001 (& see Dec. 10). 2000: “‘N.Y. lawyer charged in immigrant smuggling’“, Sept. 22-24; “Sunday’s Times on Fred Baron“, June 5 (& see “Thanks for the memories” by Walter Olson, Reason, June 1998 and subsequent letters exchange with William Hodes). 1999: “State of legal ethics” (hey, what’s wrong with witness coaching?), Sept. 9. “‘The Great Mouthpiece’” (Manhattan’s Bill Fallon, 1920s), Dec. 28, 2001. “‘Halliburton shares plunge on verdict’” (law-firm whistleblowing), Dec. 10, 2001. “‘2d Circuit Upholds Sanctions Against Firms for Frivolous Securities Claims’“, July 23, 2001 (more on sanctions: Jul. 30-31, 2002). “Estate law temptations“, July 6-8, 2001; “Lawyers charged with $4.7 million theft from clients“, April 10, 2000; “Lawyers stealing less, clients say“, Dec. 21, 1999. “Lost his live client, had to substitute dead one instead“, April 11, 2001; “Turn of the screw” (lawyers alleged to have sued without client consent), Oct. 24, 2000; “Curious feature of lawyer’s retainer” (allowed him to settle case without client consent), Sept. 12, 2000. “‘It’s time to disarm the hired guns’” (Arianna Huffington), Feb. 28-March 1, 2001; “Trustworthy professionals” (survey of public confidence), Dec. 11-12, 2000. “Fed prosecutors chafe at state ethics rules“, Oct. 16-17, 2000. “Lenzner: ‘I think what we do is practice law’” (private investigator in Oracle scandal), July 28-30, 2000. “Access to something” (lawyer accused of working for Social Security Administration while helping clients sue it), July 13, 2000. “Ready to handle your legal needs” (Stephen Glass graduates Georgetown Law), May 26-29, 2000. “Steering the evidence” (DaimlerChrysler gets sanctions against lawyers for evidence and witness tampering), May 23, 2000 (& update June 26). “‘Ad deal links Coke, lawyer in suit’” (Willie Gary, suing Coca-Cola on behalf of clients, enters into a lucrative ad deal with it), May 11, 2000. “Splash of reality” (sanctions for frivolous litigation in case of claimed Jackson Pollock painting), May 4, 2000. “Brockovich story, cont’d: the judges’ cruise“, April 18, 2000; “Brockovich story breaks wide open“, April 17, 2000 (& see Dec. 21). “Majesty of the law” (Phila. attorney Marvin Barish could face sanctions for allegedly threatening to kill opposing counsel during trial break), March 13, 2000; “Relax, you’re being taken care of” (Barish advances injury client’s rent and expenses), Dec. 14, 1999. “Legal ethics meet medical ethics” (lawyers advise schizophrenic murder defendant to go off his medication for trial), Feb. 26-27, 2000. “Secrets of class action defense” (assisting cooperative opponent to draft complaint), Feb. 25, 2000. “Watchdogs could use watching” (fee-splitting in Florida securities cases), Jan. 20, 2000. “The costs of disclosure” (lawyer reveals misconduct by client, judge), Jan. 19, 2000; “Pack your toothbrush, son” (Ala. law-firm whistleblower), Dec. 20, 1999. “Popular CLE course: ‘How to Hammer Allstate’” (insurer charged with unauthorized practice of law), Dec. 22, 1999 (update, April 18, 2000). “Splitsville, N.Y.” (New York mag on divorce), Dec. 17-19, 1999. “Victory in Florida” (plaintiffs deliberately run up gunmakers’ costs for leverage), Dec. 14, 1999. “Weekend reading: evergreens” (St. Petersburg Times Pulitzer series on probate law), Dec. 3-5, 1999; “From the evergreen file: L.A. probate horror” (estate of art collector Fred Weisman), Nov. 20-21; “Weekend reading: evergreens” (Denver probate nightmare), Oct. 23-24, 1999. “Class action fee control: it’s not just a good idea, it’s the law“, Nov. 30, 1999; “Class action coupon-clippers“, Nov. 15; “$49 million legal fee okayed in case where clients got nothing“, Sept. 28, 1999. “Accommodating theft“, Nov. 11, 1999. “Who loves trusts-and-estates lawyers?“, Nov. 8, 1999. “Criticizing lawyers proves hazardous“, Nov. 4, 1999 (update, Nov. 30); “No spotlight on me, thanks” (Houston’s John O’Quinn), Aug. 4, 1999. “State of legal ethics” (lawyers take out glossy ad to stir up will-contest litigation), Oct. 5-6, 1999. “Weekend reading: evergreens” (lawyer-abetted accident fraud), Sept. 25-26, 1999; “Wages of wrongdoing” (Staten Island lawyers convicted), Sept. 8, 1999. “Join our new Verdict Rewards program” (checks for jurors), Sept. 13, 1999 (updates, Sept. 17-19, 1999 and Aug. 4-7, 2000). “Cook County law bills a secret“, Sept. 11-12, 1999. “My lawyer is an impostor“, Sept. 3, 1999. “ABA thinks it can discourage ‘pay-for-play’“, Aug. 11, 1999 (& Aug. 14-15 update). “Like calling the Orkin man to talk about bugs” (ABA convention), Aug. 10, 1999; “Weekend reading” (ABA choice of speakers), Aug. 28-29, 1999. “No need for speed“, Aug. 3, 1999. “Weekend reading” (at execution sale, law firm buys up client’s right to sue it for malpractice), July 31-Aug. 1, 1999. “Honey, you’ve got mail” (solicitations from divorce lawyers arrive before unsuspecting spouses know they’re being divorced), July 15, 1999. |
|
Articles by Overlawyered.com editor Walter Olson: “Thanks for the memories” (coaching of witnesses), June 1998 (& subsequent letters exchange with William Hodes) “Tobacco Analysts Meet the Plaintiff’s Lawyers” (abuse of pretrial discovery), Wall Street Journal, August 30, 1995. “Juries on Trial“, review of The Jury by Stephen J. Adler and We the Jury by Jeffrey Abramson, Reason, February 1995. “Sue City: The Case Against the Contingency Fee“, excerpt from The Litigation Explosion, Policy Review, Winter 1991 [in two parts] [part one] [part two] “Dentists, Bartenders, and Lawyer Unpopularity“, Manhattan Institute Civil Justice Memo #37, April 1999. “Lawyers with Stethoscopes: Clients Beware“, Manhattan Institute Civil Justice Memo #26, June 1996. “Taming the Litigators: Why Not More Disclosure?“, Manhattan Institute Civil Justice Memo #24, February 1996. |
|
Codes of ethics: ABA Center for Professional Responsibility Some online articles of interest: James McCauley, “The Ethics of Making Legal Services Affordable…” (Virginia bar; discusses unauthorized practice, pro se litigation) Rep. Chris Cox, Testimony on tobacco settlement (1997) Lawrence Schonbrun, “Class Actions: The New Ethical Frontier” (Manhattan Institute, 1996) |