I was a guest on the Houston radio station this morning discussing personal responsibility and our propensity to litigate. A few recent cases possibly on point: “Inmate Sues Jail, Blames It for His Escapes“; five of her friends as well as the inevitable bar sued after college student’s fatal alcohol binge; and lawyer gambles away client money at the tables, then sues casinos for not stopping her. (Corrected original post title which got the call letters wrong).
Posts Tagged ‘personal responsibility’
Deep Pockets File: Foradori v. Captain D’s II
As we reported in 2005:
On December 22, 2000, 15-year-old Michael Foradori Jr. walked into a Captain D’s seafood restaurant in Tupelo, Mississippi for dinner; while there, he started flirting with the girlfriend of one of the employees, which resulted in a shouting match. “‘This (employee) was kind of picking on him, he started threatening him, he even hit him with a wadded up paper,’ said Joey Langston, Foradori’s attorney.” (More on Langston at Point of Law, May 13.) A manager restored order by kicking everyone out of the restaurant; outside, a cook who clocked out for the evening got into an altercation with Foradori, and pushed him over a wall, breaking his neck and paralyzing him.
Langston has since pled guilty to bribing a state judge in a different case; he’ll have some money to comfort him when he leaves prison, as he obtained a $20.8 million verdict in the Foradori case on the theory that, if only the restaurant had better trained its cook not to sucker-punch customers half his size, Foradori wouldn’t have been paralyzed, presumably because the threat of being fired from a minimum-wage job would’ve done what criminal sanctions would not. (Captain D’s didn’t fire the cook, Garious Harris. It is unknown whether fear of race discrimination suits had anything to do with that. Captain D’s appears to have also suffered from some questionable tactical choices by their attorneys.) The Fifth Circuit has affirmed the verdict, its hands tied to some extent by ludicrous Mississippi state law and Erie. Folo commenters speculate on the means of Langston’s success.
We hadn’t previously mentioned that the parties also sued the contractor who built the wall.
Deep Pockets File: Bauer v. Nesbitt
On September 3, 2003, 19-year-old Frederick Nesbitt was underaged at “Wing Night” at the C View Inn in Cape May, New Jersey, so the waitress at the bar only served him soda while his companions drank pitchers of beer. (His 21-year-old companion James Hamby had a suspended license for drunk driving.) But Nesbitt had been drinking rum and drinking beer with the others before they got to the bar; and Hamby spiked Nesbitt’s drinks with rum under the table at the bar, which was presumably busy serving sixty other people and didn’t notice. So Nesbitt had a 0.199 blood-alcohol level when, speeding, he “lost control [of his car], careening back and forth across the road before striking a guard rail and landing on the driver’s side. He was thrown out the rear window while Hamby, who was found in the car, was pronounced dead at the scene.” Nesbitt is serving a five-year prison term for vehicular homicide, but Hamby’s estate is suing the bar. (It settled with Nesbitt for his $50,000 insurance coverage.)
The lower court threw out the case since the bar didn’t serve Nesbitt any alcohol, but a New Jersey appellate court ruled that the bar has a duty to arrange transportation for anyone who walks in who appears to be drunk “regardless of whether Nesbitt’s intoxication resulted from the service of alcohol by the inn or from other causes” (notwithstanding the absence of such a cause of action under the dramshop statute) so the bar will now have to hope the jury credits the witnesses who say that Nesbitt didn’t appear drunk. (Mary Pat Gallagher, “N.J. Court: Bar May Be Liable for Fatal Crash Even if It Didn’t Serve Patron Alcohol”, NJ Law J, Mar. 24; Tom Hester & Abby Green, “Court adds to taverns’ duty toward safe driving”, Newark Star-Ledger, Mar. 21; Insurance Journal, Mar. 21; AP, Mar. 20; NJLawman.com message board).
If your drinks appear more expensive in New Jersey, it’s because you’re paying for insurance for drunk drivers who might stop at the bar to use the restroom. Of course, why stop at bars? Why not convenience stores?
Used client funds to gamble, now suing casinos
By reader acclaim: Arelia Margarita Taveras, once hailed as an up-and-coming lawyer and media commentator who represented 9/11 and air crash victims, says her gambling addiction lost her nearly $1 million; she has admitted dipping into client funds and was disbarred last June. Now she’s suing six Atlantic City casinos and one in Las Vegas for $20 million, saying they had a duty to stop her as it became clear her gambling was out of control. Taveras’s law practice at one point brought her $500,000 annually, and she appeared on TV and radio shows to discuss legal issues. (“Compulsive Gambler Files $20M Suit Against Casinos”, AP/CBS13.com, Mar. 8; Christina Boyle, “Scamming lawyer for 9/11 victims sues casinos for her gambling addiction”, New York Daily News, Mar. 8). More: New York Post, Associated Content.
U.K.: Injures finger dropping junk mail in letterbox
Paul O’Brien of Leeds, Great Britain, says the Royal Mail letterbox in his house is just like every other one in the development and that mail carriers have had no problem using it. Still, he’s being sued by cake decorator Joy Goodman, who says her finger was badly hurt when the thing snapped as she was pushing a leaflet, less charitably termed junk mail, through it; she can no longer pursue her trade. Says O’Brien: “I just cannot believe someone who came on to my property uninvited, to put junk mail through my door that I didn’t want, can now sue me because she hurt herself. … It seems like we’re becoming more and more like America. Everyone wants compensation.” (“Homeowner sued after woman delivering junk mail claims she injured her hand in letterbox”, Daily Mail, Feb. 21).
College student’s fatal alcohol binge
Many defendants, including five of her friends as well as the inevitable bar, are to blame for not doing more to keep Amanda Jax from downing so much alcohol that night, according to the lawsuit by her family. (“Alcohol death: five times limit”, Mankato (Minn.) Free Press, Nov. 9; Dan Nienaber, “Lawyer: Civil suit coming in drinking death”, Mankato Free Press, Dec. 28; “The defendants and their alleged actions that night”, Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Feb. 28; Scarlet Raven, Feb. 29).
Prisoner litigation Hall of Fame
Inmate Jorey Lee Brewis, also known as Rebekah Katherine, is suing officials of the Oregon Department of Corrections who allegedly ignored Brewis’s gender identity disorder, leaving Brewis to resort to — details not for the squeamish — do-it-yourself sex change surgery by way of fingernails, hair ties, rubber bands and other implements available in the cell. A spokeswoman for the corrections department “says she can’t discuss Brewis’ case because of medical privacy concerns”. (James Pitkin, “Juicy Suits: Cutting Off Her Own Testicles in Prison”, Willamette Week, Dec. 13).
“Driver Who Killed Teen Sues for Damage”
Spain: “A speeding motorist who killed a teenage cyclist is suing the boy’s parents over damage to his luxury car, the government says.” (AP/WINS, Jan. 25).
Suit: You kept me from jumping off the Empire State Building
Jeb Corliss is a professional stuntman and BASE jumper who has parachuted from the Eiffel Tower, the Golden Gate Bridge and the Petronas Towers in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, but apparently none of his stunts compared to the trauma of being forbidden from jumping off the Empire State Building in 2006: he’s sued for $30 million, complaining that the stress of being handcuffed to the railing (after security officers pulled him down as he was climbing over the safety railing) has caused “emotional distress” and “adrenal fatigue.” The suit is a counterclaim to a suit the building filed against Corliss (for an only slightly less implausible $12 million) meant to deter other jumpers from endangering third parties; a judge had dismissed reckless endangerment criminal charges on grounds that Corliss wouldn’t actually endanger anyone by jumping, a ruling the city is appealing. [NY Times City Room Blog]
Racially “targeting” predatory subprime loans? The NAACP and Baltimore suits
Cross-posted from Point of Law.
Says the NAACP complaint: “In 2004, African-American homeowners who received subprime mortgage loans from Defendants were over 30% more likely to be issued a higher-rate loan than Caucasian borrowers with the same qualifications.” (¶ 1.) Thus, it concludes, the disparity “result[s] from a systematic and predatory targeting of African-Americans.” (¶ 6.)
Similarly, Baltimore’s suit argues that Wells Fargo is more likely to foreclose in African-American neighborhoods—and that suit does not even attempt to adjust for similar qualifications or finances, just alleging racial disparity.
Of course, there is a difference between being targeted for a subprime mortgage loan and accepting a subprime mortgage loan. And I don’t believe that African-American homeowners were targeted for subprime mortgage loans because they were African-American. They were targeted because they were homeowners.
Between 2001 and 2005, I was a law-firm associate, high-income, making multiples of what I make today at a thinktank. And, like I am today, I was also white. And the minute my adjustable-rate mortgage was registered in the title books in 2001, I got several solicitations a week in the mail from fly-by-night mortgage brokers offering to refinance my mortgage with ludicrous financial products. (And when I made the mistake of investigating on-line options for switching to a fixed-rate mortgage in 2004, I also got several e-mails a day and phone-calls a month on the same basis to the point that I switched e-mail providers.)
Somehow, I resisted refinancing with a mortgage that was not favorable to me in the long run—I took a 5.25% fixed-rate instead. But I sure was targeted with subprime opportunities, especially as the real-estate prices in my neighborhood skyrocketed about 10% a year. And if, with my skin-color, income, education-level, and impeccable credit-score, I was targeted, so was every homeowner and their grandmother.
To the extent a statistical study says minorities were, ceteris paribus, more likely to receive unfavorable mortgages than whites, the study reflects a specification error, perhaps in failing to account for different levels of consumer education. Another possibility: there is a lot of state-by-state regulation of the mortgage industry. Are subprime mortgages more likely in states with high minority populations, for example? Are subprime mortgage brokers more likely to be aggressive in urban areas in states on the coasts where real estate prices were increasing faster than average, and those states correspond to states with high minority populations?
Note that the CRL study that has been driving the debate and highlighted in the NAACP suit finds that for many types of loans, whites were “disadvantaged” relative to Hispanics, which would seem to count against a racial explanation (unless one believes that bankers hold a racial animus against whites and towards Hispanics) and more towards a geographic explanation.
Note also the irony that these same defendants were accused of failing to offer loans to African-Americans just a few years ago. (See also Apr. 1.)
Finally, note that the NAACP complaint is legally frivolous in at least one respect because of the lack of standing in a federal court. Domino’s Pizza, Inc. v. McDonald, 546 U.S. 470 (2006) (no § 1981 standing for third parties). (Baltimore brings no § 1981 claim.) Fair Housing Act standing is questionable, too, given the lack of allegation of injury to NAACP in particular, though that could be fairly easily rectified by an amended complaint, especially in the Ninth Circuit. Cf. Spann v. Colonial Vill., Inc., 899 F.2d 24 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (“[a]n organization cannot, of course, manufacture the injury necessary to maintain a suit from its expenditure of resources on that very suit”) (R. Bader Ginsburg, J.); Fair Housing of Marin v. Combs, 285 F.3d 899, 902 (9th Cir. 2002). N.B. that there is an amended version of the NAACP complaint that may already fix these issues. NAACP v. Ameriquest Mortgage Co., No. 8:07-cv-00794-AG-AN (C.D. Cal.). For some reason, this is not available on PACER, so I haven’t seen it.
Related: Jan. 8 (Krauss on Baltimore suit); Apr. 25 (me on third-party liability for subprime lending).
(Disclosure: I own less than $15,000 in stock in Citigroup, one of the defendants in the case.)