Paternalism watch: Seattle has banned, in certain areas of the city, the sale of “29 brands of cheap booze favored by the homeless,” including Thunderbird, Richard’s Wild Irish Rose and Night Train Express. “But on the streets of downtown and Capitol Hill, people who acknowledged they were homeless and drunk seemed to find ways to make do.” (Kery Murakami, “Alcoholics finding way around ban”, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Nov. 2)(via Balko, Reason “Hit and Run”).
Posts Tagged ‘Seattle’
October 30 roundup
- My Oct. 28 WSJ op-ed is now on-line for free. [AEI]
- Your tax dollars at work: $24.2 million for two 17-year-old trespassers burned by high-voltage electrical wires six feet above the top of an Amtrak train that they had climbed. The one who received “only” $6.8 million had injuries minor enough that he’s serving in the Army now. [Lancaster Online via Northridge Buzz Blog]
- Refuting trial lawyers’ claims of repealing McCarran-Ferguson as a panacea for insurance rates. [Point of Law]
- “At what point are these accommodations exacerbating learning disabilities, and creating life disabiltities?” [Ivey; Wall Street Journal]
- $1.5 million verdict: plaintiff blamed her bipolar disorder on a nurse’s error that caused a lung to collapse. [Columbus Ledger-Enquirer; see also Kevin MD commenters]
- Trial lawyers insult West Virginia businessmen for daring to challenge their hegemony. [Institute for Legal Reform]
- Bank of America overcredits account, takes money back, gets hit with California state class action verdict that could cost billions. [Point of Law]
- Latest Duke lacrosse case outrage: prosecutor’s office says it hasn’t even interviewed alleged victim. [Volokh; Outside the Beltway; Corner]
- In anticipation of Philip Morris v. Williams, hear the great Sheila Birnbaum argue State Farm v. Campbell. [Oyez MP3 via Mass Torts Prof]
- Kristol: the U.S. Senate still matters because of judicial nominations. [Weekly Standard]
- Election challenge to Washington state incumbent Supreme Court justice who is supported by trial lawyers. [Seattle Post-Intelligencer via Bashman]
- Don’t tell AG Lockyer, or he’ll want to sue the fat for global warming. [NY Times via Kevin MD]
Inviting conservative author = hostile environment?
Two teachers have sued an elite Seattle private school charging race bias in the terms of employment: “Among the plaintiffs’ complaints was Lakeside’s invitation to conservative commentator Dinesh D’Souza to speak as part of a distinguished lecture series.” (John Iwasaki, “Teachers accuse Lakeside School of bias”, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Oct. 13)(via Taranto). More: Paul Secunda agrees something is amiss here (Oct. 19).
Coffee shop owner sues Starbucks
On antitrust grounds:
In her lawsuit, [Penny Stafford of Belvi Coffee & Tea Exchange] says that Starbucks employees would make frequent runs past the deli with free samples. She said that Starbucks also had non-competitive leases that blocked her from the most desirable locations in Bellevue and Seattle.
The suit claims that Starbucks, fueled by “insatiable and unchecked ambition,” wanted to squash all competition.
John Stott, who owns Johnika’s Deli, said that he advised Stafford not to open a business so near a Starbucks.
Representing Stafford in the suit is Overlawyered favorite Hagens Berman Sobol & Shapiro. (“Coffee shop owner sues Starbucks”, UPI/MonstersAndCritics, Sept. 27; Melissa Allison, “Starbucks sued over ‘unchecked ambition'”, Seattle Times, Sept. 26; Keith Sharfman, Truth on the Market, Sept. 25; Lattman, Sept. 27).
George Will on Carlson-Wilbur case
Playing chicken on railroad tracks
Kent, Wash.: A suit against Amtrak is set to go to trial next month on behalf of the survivors of a pair of 11- and 13-year-old girls who engaged in that ill-advised pastime. “The case apparently is the only one of its kind in [Washington] state where an appellate court” — that would be the Ninth Circuit — “has reversed the dismissal of a case against a train company.” (Nancy Bartley, “Lawsuit in train deaths is beating the odds”, Seattle Times, May 3).
Update: State not liable for assault by foster-care teens
Updating our Nov. 23, 2003 item: By an 8-1 margin, the Washington Supreme Court “has swept aside an $8.3 million civil judgment against the state for the vicious beating in 1999 of a Somali refugee by a group of teenagers living in a West Seattle foster home.” The court ruled that while a state agency overseeing foster care is under a legal duty to protect children placed in care, it does not have a duty to safeguard members of the general public from the children. (Peter Lewis, “Court says state isn’t liable for crimes by foster kids”, Seattle Times, Feb. 17; decision/ concurrence/ dissent in Said Aba Sheikh v. Kevin S. Choe et al; video of oral argument on TVW).
In a December piece for the WSJ I wrote critically about the way earlier court decisions in Washington state have left the state’s taxpayers unusually exposed to damage claims over crimes that the state should allegedly have done more to prevent. The new decision may indicate (or so we can hope, anyway) that the state’s high court is increasingly aware of the downside of such wide-open liability.
Update: Maine jury hammers Hagens Berman
Seattle’s best-known plaintiff’s firm gets a huge black eye and is told to pay $10.8 million : “The jury unanimously found Wednesday that lawyers from Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP violated their duty of loyalty to three small water bottlers that in 2003 were close to settling a claim with Nestle Waters North America, the owner of Poland Spring Water Co.” For more about the case, see Mar. 20 and links from there. “Jurors will return to federal court next week to settle the issue of punitive damages.” (“Jury awards more than $10 million in water bottlers’ lawsuit”, AP/Boston Globe, Mar. 23; Vanesso Ho and Mike Lewis, “Seattle law firm told to pay $10.8 million”, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Mar.24; Lattman, Mar. 24).
Update: Corrie family’s suit against Caterpillar
The parents of Rachel Corrie, the protester who died at 23 when she attempted to block an Israeli bulldozer from demolishing a Palestinian home, are appealing a federal judge’s decision to throw out their lawsuit against Peoria-based Caterpillar Inc., which manufactured the bulldozer (Mar. 16, 2005). (Gene Johnson, “Rachel Corrie’s family appeals lawsuit against bulldozer-maker”, AP/Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Mar. 23). Were courts to invite lawsuits against companies for lawful sales of this sort, they would open up many opportunities for litigants to use tort law as a surrogate sanctions mechanism against foreign governments, even though in our constitutional scheme it is Congress and the executive branch, rather than the courts, which bear the responsibility of weighing the policy considerations in favor of or against such sanctions.
Lawyers’ reputations soaked in Poland Spring fight
“Mutually assured character destruction”: that’s what Boston Globe columnist Alex Beam says to expect from a trial that started March 7 in Portland, Me. federal court that pits some of the country’s better-known members of the plaintiff’s bar against each other. Among the cast of characters: Jan Schlichtmann, of “A Civil Action” fame, Steve Berman of Seattle-based Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, and Massachusetts tobacco litigator Thomas Sobol of the same firm, and Alabama’s Garve Ivey. At issue is whether lawyers breached legal ethics or sold out the interests of class members in their sharp-elbowed maneuvers to control the process of litigation and reach a lucrative settlement with Poland Spring’s parent company, Nestle. Also testifying is celebrity enviro-pol Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who had signed up a water company he controls as one of the plaintiffs — gee, who knew RFK Jr. was tied in with hotshot plaintiff’s lawyers? (Alex Beam, “An uncivil action in Maine”, Mar. 8; Gregory D. Kesich, “Water bottlers in court to recoup lost settlement”, Portland Press Herald, Mar. 8; “Law firm’s handling of Poland Spring case at issue in trial”, AP/Boston Globe, Mar. 8; Gregory D. Kesich, “Water case puts lawyers’ ethics on trial”, Portland Press Herald, Mar. 10; “Witnesses tell of how Nestle case fell apart”, Mar. 17). The trial is expected to conclude this week. For more on the Poland Spring class actions, see Sept. 10, 2003, Feb. 2, 2004 and Jun. 25, 2004.