“‘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.
Other resources: Websites “Freedom of Speech vs. Workplace Harassment Law” (highly informative site maintained by Prof. Eugene Volokh, UCLA Law School) Organizations
The shelf of books critical of the overreach of harassment law got at least three important additions in 1999. Daphne Patai of the University of Massachusetts, known already as a co-author of Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales From the Strange World of Women’s Studies, published Heterophobia: Sexual Harassment and the Future of Feminism. Cathy Young, columnist for the Detroit News, published Ceasefire: Why Women and Men Must Join Forces to Achieve True Equality. And Joan Kennedy Taylor, associated with the Cato Institute, published What to Do When You Don’t Want to Call the Cops: Or a Non-Adversarial Approach to Sexual Harassment. (Also see our editor’s 1997 contribution, The Excuse Factory.) Archived personal responsibility items, pre-July 2003Tipple your way to court, 2003: “Shouldn’t have let him get so drunk” (Australia), May 12. 2002: “‘Woman freezes; sues city, cabbie’“, Sept. 18-19; “Wasn’t his fault for lying drunk under truck“, Aug. 16-18; “Hey, no fair talking about the pot” (highway rollover), Apr. 12-14; “European workplace notes” (employer responsible for vodka overdose), Feb. 25-26; “‘Drunken Driver’s Widow Wins Court’s OK To Sue Carmaker’“, Feb. 25-26. 2001: “‘Teen hit by train while asleep on tracks sues railroad’“, Dec. 12; “‘Man suing after drunken driving crash’“, Aug. 20-21; “Don’t rock the Coke machine“, Jul. 20-22; “Court says tipsy topless dancer can sue club“, Jul. 3-4; “Jury: drunk driver hardly responsible at all for fatal crash“, Jun. 15-17; “It was the bar’s fault“, Apr. 13-15; “‘Court upholds workers compensation for drunk, injured worker’“, Apr. 6-8; “‘Woman who drove drunk gets $300,000’” (Ontario), Feb. 7-8 (& see Sept. 24, second case: $18 million); “‘All you can drink’ winner sues over fall“, Jan. 31-Feb. 1. 2000: “Zapped pylon-climber sues liquor-servers, utility“, March 6. 1999: “Personal responsibility wins a round” (judge rejects case from Pa. man who got drunk and climbed high voltage catenary), Sept. 17-19. “Should have watched his step answering call of nature“, Mar. 8-9, 2003. “Lightning bolt in amusement park’s parking lot“, Jun. 23, 2003; “‘Woman attacked by goose sues county’“, Jan. 27-28, 2003; “Quite an ankle sprain” (watch where you’re going in parks), Apr. 20-22, 2001. “MIT sued over student’s nitrous-oxide death“, Feb. 25, 2003; “By reader acclaim: ‘Parents file suit over student’s drug death’” (abuse of Oxycontin), Jul. 25, 2001. “Take care of myself? That’s the doc’s job“, Feb. 14-16, 2003; “Claim: docs should have done more to help woman quit smoking and lose weight” (Pa.), Sept. 18-19, 2002. “Satirical-disclaimer Hall of Fame” (Australian humor magazine), Oct. 28-29, 2002; “Tobacco: Boeken record” (The Onion parody), June 19, 2001; “Jury orders ‘Big Chocolate’ to pay $135 billion to obese consumers” (parody), Aug. 3, 2000; “This side of parodies” (fictional account of self-inflicted icepick injury), Oct. 5-6, 1999. Sports risks: “Sis-Boom-Sue” (cheerleading), Jan. 15-16, 2003; “Skating first, instructions later“, Sept. 25-26, 2002; “Pitcher hit by line drive sues maker of baseball bat“, Apr. 19-21, 2002; “Australian roundup” (Perth bodysurfer), Nov. 23-25, 2001; “Needed: assumption of risk” (baseball thrown into stands, skydiving), July 27-29; “‘Lawsuits could tame ski slopes’“, Feb. 6, 2001; “Promising areas for suits” (foul-ball cases and other stadium injuries), Dec. 7, 2000; “Teams liable for fans’ safety” (Colorado: hockey puck hit into stands), Aug. 15; “‘Skydivers don’t sue’“, May 26-29; “Trips on shoelace, demands $10 million from Nike“, April 7-9, 2000. Gambling: Letter to the editor, Oct. 23; “Personal responsibility roundup“, Sept. 12, 2002; “Sin-suit city“, Jun. 10; “‘Next tobacco’ watch: gambling“, May 20-21, 2002 (& May 31); “‘Gambling addiction’ class action” (Quebec), June 20, 2001. “‘Family of boy injured by leopard may sue’“, Jul. 18, 2002; “Skinny-dipping with killer whale: ‘incredibly bad judgment’“, Sept. 21, 1999 (Oct. 7 update: case dropped). “Wasn’t his fault for lying drunk under truck“, Aug. 16-18, 2002; “‘Win Big! Lie in Front of a Train!’“, Jun. 26-27, 2002 (& Jul. 12-14); “Australian roundup” (graffiti artist on train), Nov. 23-25, 2001; “Hit after laying on RR tracks; sues railroad“, Oct. 23, 2001. “‘Man awarded $60,000 for falling over barrier’“, Mar. 5, 2002. “Utah: rescue searchers sued“, Nov. 26, 2001. “Suit blames drugmaker for Columbine“, Oct. 24-25, 2001. “Mosh pit mayhem“, Sept. 7-9, 2001. “Urban legend alert: six ‘irresponsibility’ lawsuits“, Aug. 27-28, 2001. “Don’t rock the Coke machine“, Jul. 20-22, 2001. “Tobacco: Boeken record“, June 19, 2001. Stop having fun (children’s recreation): see schools page. “Tendency of elastic items to recoil well known“, Mar. 6, 2001. “By reader acclaim” (sues alleged crack dealers over own addiction), Jan. 11, 2001. “Smoker’s suit nixed in Norway“, Dec. 18-19, 2000; “Personal responsibility takes a vacation in Miami” (Engle tobacco verdict), July 8, 1999. “Highway responsibility” (Derrick Thomas suit), Nov. 28, 2000. “Fat tax proposed in New Zealand“, Oct. 31, 2000. “More things you can’t have: raw-milk cheeses“, Oct. 3, 2000; “More things you can’t have” (unpasteurized cider, New England square dances), Sept. 27, 1999; “More things you can’t have” (rare hamburgers, food sent to summer camp), August 9, 1999. “Smoking and responsibility: columnists weigh in” (after Florida verdict), Jul. 28-30, 2000. “‘”Whiplash!” America’s most frivolous lawsuits’” (book collects cases), Jul. 14-16, 2000. “Inmate: you didn’t supervise me” (horseplay alone in cell), Jul. 7, 2000. “Can’t sue over affair with doctor” (court rules it was consensual), Jun. 13, 2000. “Risky? Who’da thunk it?” (currency speculator sues over losses), Jun. 9-11, 2000. “‘Jury awards apparent record $220,000 for broken finger’” (hurt while dancing), May 22, 2000. “Videogame maker agrees to furnish safety gloves“, Mar. 13, 2000. “Letourneau scandal: now where’s my million?” (boy sues), Apr. 20, 2000. “All dressed up“, Apr. 19, 2000. “Down repressed-memory lane I: costly fender-bender” (eggshell-psyche plaintiff), Dec. 29-30, 1999. “Down repressed-memory lane II: distracted when she signed” (separation agreement), Dec. 29-30, 1999. “GM verdict roundup” (lawyers shift drunk drivers’ responsibility to automakers), Dec. 16, 1999; “Drunks have rights, too“, Dec. 1, 1999. “Rolling the dice (cont’d)” (Internet gambler sues credit card companies that advanced him money), Dec. 7, 1999; “Rolling the dice” (same), Aug. 26, 1999. “Responsibility, RIP” (columnist Mona Charen), Nov. 2, 1999. “The art of blame” (death of child left in hot van), Oct. 20, 1999. “Nominated by reader acclamation” (killer’s parents sue school district, lawmen for failing to prevent Columbine massacre), Oct. 18, 1999. “Block PATH to lawsuits” (fall out of tree in yard, sue your employer), Sept. 1, 1999. “To restore individual responsibility, bring back contract principles” (Cato Institute paper by Prof. Michael Krauss), Aug. 16, 1999. “Somebody might trip” (NYC condemns prints-of-the- Hollywood-stars sidewalk as slip hazard), Aug. 13, 1999. “All have lost, and all must have damages” (huge award to salesman who hawked bad insurance policies since he’s a victim too), Aug. 3, 1999. Through much of American history, courts discouraged lawsuits arising from risks that individuals were deemed to have assumed in the course of going about familiar activities, such as the risk of being thrown while horseback riding, of slipping on toys underfoot while visiting a house with children, or of being hit with a foul ball while attending a ball game. (Stored search on “assumption of risk”: Google, Alta Vista). Under the doctrine of “contributory negligence”, they often dismissed, as a matter of law, cases where a complainant’s own negligence had helped cause an accident. They were even less likely to entertain cases in which someone’s knowing or deliberate dereliction had placed him in physical peril, such as cases in which people sue over injuries sustained in the course of committing crimes or attempting suicide. And finally, they gave broad respect to express contractual disclaimers or waivers of liability: if a party was on notice that the other side in a transaction wasn’t willing to assume a responsibility, it wouldn’t be easy to tag them later with that responsibility in court. By the 1950s all these old barriers to liability had come under sustained attack in the law schools, where they were viewed as insulating defendants’ misconduct from legal scrutiny and impeding the forward march of liability law as a (high-overhead) variety of social insurance. Most states moved from contributory negligence to comparative negligence, which allows a plaintiff whose negligence helped cause an accident to sue over it anyway, though for a reduced recovery. Waivers and disclaimers began to be struck down as unconscionable, against public policy, not spelled out with sufficient clarity, etc. And assumption of risk was whittled down by way of a dozen techniques: the most influential torts scholar of the postwar period, William Prosser, took the view that “that implied reasonable assumption of risk should not be allowed to reduce a plaintiff’s damage in any way” (Chase Van Gorder, “Assumption of Risk Under Washington Law“). The result is today’s American legal environment in which plaintiffs routinely try their luck at suits after being injured climbing high-voltage utility structures while drunk, skinny-dipping in icy pools with captive killer whales, trying “wheelies” and other stunts on industrial forklifts, and smoking for decades. Some of these suits succeed at obtaining settlements while others fail, and it’s important to bear in mind that assumption of risk and related doctrines have not disappeared entirely. Their general decay, however, has been important in bringing us today’s hypertrophy of such areas of law as premises liability, product liability and recreational liability. The website of attorney D. Pamela Gaines has useful resources on assumption of risk as it applies to such areas as premises liability, recreation and amusement parks. At the International Mountain Bicycling Association site, Tina Burckhardt explains “recreational use statutes” which grant some protection from liability lawsuits to landowners who allow free recreational use of their property. |