- Trouble with hunting bad/burdensome regulations: most of them have entrenched advocates [NY Times] “Obama — the Great Deregulator?” [Jeff Jacoby, Boston Globe]. Earlier here and here;
- Now we find out: tax hikes on outsourcing in 9/11 compensation bill infuriate India, were never vetted by Hill tax panels [PoL; more on Easter eggs in bill] Law firm that advertises for 9/11 dust clients is fan of Sen. Gillibrand [Stoll]
- France will stop censoring some historical images of smokers in ads [NY Times]
- “2010: The Year of the Angry, Company-Suing Plaintiff” [WSJ Law Blog] “The most sued companies in America” [Fox Business, counting federal-court suits only]
- Death by drunk driving: As bad as purposeful murder? Worse? [Greenfield]
- EPA gets specific on its plans to advance “environmental justice,” combat disparate racial impact in project siting, etc. [WLF, Popeo, earlier here, here, here, etc.]
- Winners of Chamber’s “Most Ridiculous Lawsuits of 2010” competition [US Chamber ILR]
- “If the FCC had regulated the Internet” [Jack Shafer, Slate]
Posts Tagged ‘tobacco’
Smoking bans and heart attack “miracles,” cont’d
After much uncritical reportage of claims that heart attacks in this or that community fell immediately and precipitously after a smoking ban went into effect, a larger and more careful study finds no evidence for any such miraculous effect [Jacob Sullum, Reason] Earlier here, etc.
November 22 roundup
Product liability edition:
- You mean cigarettes were dangerous? “Florida jury awards $80M to daughter in anti-smoking case” [AP]
- “Acne drug not found to increase suicide risk” [BBC, earlier on Accutane here, here, etc.]
- “Man hit by jar of exploding fruit says $150,000 award isn’t enough” [Detroit News via Obscure Store]
- Chicago accident coverage exemplifies Toyota acceleration hysteria [Fumento/CEI] NHTSA-NRC panel findings on subject [PoL]
- Strict product liability is in decline, according to Prof. David Owen [Abnormal Use]
- More questions raised on $500 million Nevada hepatitis verdict [PoL]
- Notwithstanding chatter in press about toxic cosmetics, study finds cosmetologists have below-average cancer rates [David Oliver]
- Florida juries repeatedly hold Ford liable for millions when drivers fall asleep [five years ago on Overlawyered]
Claim: touching smokers’ clothing can cause “massive” nerve damage
Accurate science, or Science For Your Own Good? [Michael Siegel]
November 9 roundup
- White House panel’s counsel: no evidence corner-cutting caused Gulf spill [NYT, Reuters] Furor ensues [WaPo]
- Report: grief counselors assigned to Democratic congressional staffers [Maggie Haberman, Politico]
- “Lawyer Sues for Humiliation and Lost Business Due to Misspelled Yellowbook Ad” [ABA Journal, South Dakota]
- Argument today in important Supreme Court case, AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion: will courts respect freedom of contract in consumer arbitration context, or yield Litigation Lobby the monopoly it seeks over dispute resolution? [Ted at PoL]
- No search warrant needed: armed deputies in Orlando storm unlicensed barbershops, handcuff barbers [Balko, Reason “Hit and Run”]
- After Colorado hit-run, banker allowed to plead down to misdemeanors lest his job be at risk [Greenfield]
- FDA to decide whether to ban menthol in cigarettes [CEI]
- Reshuffling blackjack decks is not “racketeering” [ten years ago on Overlawyered]
Censoring movie depictions of smoking
“There has been a growing effort over the past decade from groups such as Smoke Free Movies and SceneSmoking.org, which hosts the annual Hackademy Awards, to pressure Hollywood into cutting back the amount of smoking in films. Now those groups are getting government support for their cause from US Reps. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass) and Joseph Pitts (R-PA) and from a group of health organizations, including Legacy, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association and the World Health Organization.” [Washington Post] Legacy, incidentally, is a group created as a result of the $246-billion state-Medicaid tobacco settlement whose purposes include pushing for further “tobacco control” — one of many examples in this area in which government-driven funding is employed to further advocacy on one side of controversial issues.
“Colorado Supreme Court upholds ban of smoking on stage”
The state’s high court “voted to uphold lower-court decisions barring cigarette use in performances. … a coalition of state and national theater groups [had] argued in multiple courts that the ban infringed on free-speech rights and interfered with their abilities to accurately produce plays.” [Denver Post, OnPoint News (outspoken dissent by Justice Gregory Hobbs), Michelle Minton/CEI “Open Market”, Declarations and Exclusions]
Suit over townhouse neighbor’s smoking
“A Dallas woman has filed a lawsuit seeking six figures from a former neighbor and landlord for damage she says was caused by cigarette smoke wafting through adjoining walls of her high-end townhome. ‘Smoking is not a right, it’s a privilege,’ said Chris Daniel, a retired nurse.” [Dallas Morning News]
NYC to ban smoking in parks and beaches?
Even the NYT detects libertarian objections among Gothamites to the city’s latest paternalistic scheme. More: Jacob Sullum; William Saletan (ban based on “cultural contamination” rather than actual physical risk) and followup (science of outdoor secondhand smoke).
September 15 roundup
- It’s almost as if Arizona wants to encourage broken-windshield fraud [Coyote]
- “They are so greedy that — how awful! — they are selling food cheap.” [Ann Althouse takes out after Michael Pollan]
- Tom Freeland examines “Clarksdale sugar daddy” prosecution [Northern Mississippi Commentor; cf. Radley Balko]
- “Fire-safe” cigarettes are apparently not pleasurable to smoke, which may be part of their appeal to backers [Sullivan]
- “Justices: Bags of cash, guilty plea merit Seattle lawyer’s disbarment” [Seattle Times]
- Facebook plays a revenge prank on TechCrunch, and there’s a lesson there for the thin-skinned [Ken at Popehat]
- “The Rubber Room: The Battle Over New York City’s Worst Teachers” [Steven Brill, The New Yorker; Joanne Jacobs]
- One trial lawyer’s anything-but-supportive view of “runners” and “chasers” [Turkewitz]