Peter Jose Smith of Provo, Utah, is suing the Mercado Latino market, saying it violated his accommodation rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act because it wouldn’t let him wear inline skates in the store behind his wheelchair. Store owner Hugo Martinez said Smith, who has sued other local businesses, was asked to comply with the store’s policy against skates after he “was riding quickly in the store and bumped into another customer”. (Ace Stryker, “Disabled Provo man suing Latin market”, Provo Daily Herald, Jul. 18).

New Jersey dental assistant Amber Arpaio found herself an asterisk-to-an-asterisk in the history of political scandals when it was reported that Ashley Dupre used Arpaio’s lost driver’s license to pass for more than 17 when she made a “Girls Gone Wild” video that later became notorious after the exposure of Dupre’s paid liaison with Gov. Eliot Spitzer. So now Arpaio is suing Dupre and Joe Francis, impresario of the “Girls Gone Wild” series. The news coverage of the lawsuit contains no indication that Arpaio suffered any damage to her credit record or other tangible interests from the affair, but she wants upwards of $10 million in cash solace for defamation and invasion of privacy, and, per her attorney, because “when someone searches her name on the Internet, pornographic material comes up.” Much better, when someone searches her name on the Internet, for intimations of litigiousness to come up. (Nancy Dillon, “Duped by Dupre: N.J. woman charges Spitzer call girl with identity theft”, New York Daily News, Jul. 17; AP/Comcast, Jul. 17)(& Prettier Than Napoleon). Plus: complaint at The Smoking Gun (h/t commenter VMS).

It will come as no surprise to anyone who surfs the Web much that many parked domains and 404 error pages on otherwise active websites carry Google keyword ads. (If you don’t know what a parked domain is, this is one; if you don’t know what a 404 error page is, here’s ours.) It might also seem reasonable that ads in these locations would be glanced at and even clicked on by some non-trivial number of visitors, who will often be looking for information on the relevant topic (that’s the idea behind keywords) and, frustrated in their initial search for content, might be ready to check out an advertiser’s substitute content. However, Boston lawyer Hal K. Levitte professes great dismay and consternation that 15 percent of the $887.67 he spent on his ad campaign went toward placements in such inferior spots, resulting in 693 clickthroughs and no actual conversions to prospect or client status. So he’d like class action status to sue for fraud and unjust enrichment on behalf of all other Google ad customers (Legal Blog Watch, Jul. 16).

P.S. From comments, reader J.B.:

Not sure what’s fraudulent here, when Mr. Levitte set up his ad campaign in Google AdWords he was given the opportunity to specify whether he wanted his ads to appear only on Google search result pages, or also in other places such as these parked domains.

In addition, Google gives you the option to pay less for clicks from these “inferior” spots, because as he found out, they often result in less-desirable visitors.

We in the technology world have a saying for people like Mr. Levitte: “RTFM”

In advertising; class actions; Google

“I have no problem being accused of being a professional whatever,” says Allen Fox, who’s filed 139 disabled-accessibility lawsuits over six years in concert with attorney Samuel Aurelio, as many as eight of the similarly worded complaints in a day. Most of the complaints result in the payment of legal fees and Fox, of West Palm Beach, Fla., pays nothing on the rare occasions he loses.

Aurilio, who has filed 274 ADA cases in Florida, including Fox’s, laments that a few lawyers have given all of those who fight for the disabled a bad name. The poster child is a North Miami lawyer who in 2003 was sanctioned by U.S. District Judge Donald Middlebrooks for filing 13 lawsuits on behalf of a man he claimed was a quadriplegic who later walked in to give his deposition in one of the cases.

Not only was the man not disabled, he “did not know what a quadriplegic was, and when the term was explained to him, he was repulsed by the thought of being so incapacitated,” Middlebrooks wrote in a blistering 18-page order sanctioning lawyer Lawrence Fuller.

Fuller was also admonished by the Florida Bar; by one estimate, he’d taken in $3 million in his ADA practice by that point. (Jane Musgrave, “‘Pro Plaintiff’ Crusades for Disabled Access”, Palm Beach Post/Lakeland Ledger, May 12).

A judge in Westchester County, N.Y. (hey, that’s here!) has ruled on the circumstances under which libel complainants can employ compulsory process to unveil the identity of anonymous ill-wishers on blogs and online forums. In this case the plaintiff is Richard Ottinger, a former liberal Congressman who’s now the dean of Pace University Law School (NYLJ via Greenfield).

Readers turned it into more of a general funny-sign contest, but some of the entries hint at a legally driven tendency to overwarn. Among the most disturbing messages is the one on #53, “Toilets and urinals flushed with reclaimed water. Do not drink.” (Scroll to “As if you would anyway“).

P.S. From comments, Jane T.: “Yesterday I noticed that a commercial for a drug that is prescribed to reduce the size of enlarged prostates issued a warning (in the ad) that women should not take it for various reasons none of which were that women do not have prostates.”

The Texas Review of Law & Politics has published my review of Thomas Geoghegan’s book. I differ from the favorable reviews of Adam Liptak and others:

Many books and writers have documented the problems caused by the tremendous expansion of liability in the last half century. In response, several writers on the political left have written defenses of unfettered liability or indictments of the tort reform movement, sometimes even rationalizing such infamous outliers as the McDonald’s coffee case as legitimate uses of the tort system.

The latest arrival in this genre comes from much-celebrated labor lawyer and author Thomas Geoghegan: See You in Court: How the Right Made America a Lawsuit Nation. Unlike many on his political side of the aisle, Geoghegan acknowledges that the litigation explosion has harmed America, but blames it on right-wing policies. Deregulation, deunionization, and the right’s putative dismantling of the legal system and Rule of Law, Geoghegan argues, have driven Americans to the courts by cutting off alternative routes to social justice. Geoghegan effectively demonstrates that the left should view skeptically the claims of the litigation lobby, a skepticism sadly disappearing from the political discourse as the Democratic Party more and more reflexively adopts the positions of trial-lawyer benefactors at the expense of its other constituents. But Geoghegan’s attempt to blame conservatives for the increased role of litigation in society suffers from non sequiturs, self-contradictory arguments, and a general failure to engage his opponents’ arguments fairly.

Thanks to those at Overlawyered who commented on an earlier draft and helped make the paper better by reminding me that political contributions were a revealed preference.

When driving through the hamburger chain’s order line, Karen Tumeh, who is hearing-impaired, doesn’t like to use the order box, which she says makes her hearing aid screech. Her lawsuit apparently construes the Americans with Disabilities Act as entitling her instead to place her order upon arriving at the pickup window and wait there until it is ready, even if other customers are lined up behind her. Employees at a Lincoln, Neb. outlet of the hamburger chain allegedly told her that if she couldn’t or wouldn’t use the order box she should come inside and order from the counter rather than hold up other patrons in the car line. (Clarence Mabin, “Hearing-impaired woman sues McDonald’s”, Jul. 15; AP/Omaha World Herald, Jul. 16).

Class actions of the lawyers, by the lawyers, for the lawyers? To quote the Law.com summary: “A federal judge has rejected a proposed co-lead plaintiff for the Monster Worldwide securities fraud class action because the representative knew nothing about the case. Southern District of New York Judge Jed Rakoff had some pointed words for lead plaintiffs counsel Labaton Sucharow, saying the Steamship Trade Association International Longshoremen’s Pension Fund was ’simply the willing pawn of counsel’ because it ‘has no interest in, genuine knowledge of, and/or meaningful involvement in this case.’” Judge Rakoff noted that pension fund co-chairman Horace Alston had represented himself under oath as the fund’s most knowledgeable person about the suit. “However, Mr. Alston then testified that he did not know the name of the stock at issue in this case, did not know the name of either individual defendant, did not know whether STA-ILA ever owned Monster stock, did not know if an amended complaint had been filed, did not know whether he had ever seen any complaint in the action,” leading Judge Rakoff to declare that he would “not be party to a sham.” (Mark Hamblett, “Lead Plaintiff Pick Rejected as Merely ‘Pawn of Counsel’”, New York Law Journal, Jul. 17).

I’ve got a lengthy new post up at Point of Law on this topic. Excerpt:

… some of our friends in the business community have lately been taking up as one of their big causes the direct voter election of state court judges. They argue in a populist vein that the common people ought to exert control over the judiciary and that methods such as gubernatorial appointment or “Missouri Plan” merit-screening panels are too open to influence behind the scenes from bar insiders, politicians, and trial lawyers. They also appear to believe that litigation outcomes will be fairer and more predictable from a business person’s point of view when judges hold their offices by election than when they are appointed. … I must say that I find it really odd that business groups have gone off on this kick….

In judicial elections; Missouri

With the new Christian Bale/Heath Ledger Batman movie, “The Dark Knight,” opening at midnight tonight, it’s worth linking to our popular post of three years ago about how Gotham City must have had substantial tort reform to permit a sequel to go forward without Bruce Wayne being bankrupted…

(And I have to say that Stark Industries would be subject to similar shareholder lawsuits after “Iron Man” this year.)

• Another compilation of the hundred best law blogs, with a familiar name among the nine “general” picks, so thanks for that ["Criminal Justice Degrees Guide" via ABA Journal]
• Europe has a transnational association of personal injury lawyers, funded by the EU, but with no wheeler-dealer, masters-of-the-universe vibe in evidence [PoL]
• Delta wasn’t liable in Kentucky Comair crash, but some plaintiffs sued it anyway in what their lawyer describes as an “abundance of caution” — that’s a diplomatic way to put it [Aero-News Net; link fixed now]
• U.K.: Mom told she’d need to pass criminal record check before being allowed to take her own son to school [Telegraph]
• Regular coverage of the litigious exploits of delusional inmate Jonathan Lee Riches, if you’ve got the stomach for them [Dreadnaught blog]
• Federal Circuit reverses $85 million infringement verdict won by Raymond Niro, blasted by critics as original “patent troll” [AmLaw Daily]
• “Determined to defeat lawsuits over addiction, the casino industry is funding research at a Harvard-affiliated lab.” [Salon]
• Hired through nepotism by in-laws, then fired after divorce, sues on grounds of “marital status discrimination” [eight years ago on Overlawyered]

A Southfield, Mich. company named Park West has made a big business of conducting art auctions on cruise ships offshore, while leaving more than a few dissatisfied customers in its wake. Fine Art Registry, a subscriber website founded by Theresa Franks, has published some of those customer complaints as well as original articles warning of Park West’s practices. “In April the company sued Ms. Franks; Fine Art Registry’s lead writer, David Phillips; and a Dalí specialist that the site quoted, Bruce Hochman, for defamation.” And as so often proves to be the case when a business reacts to criticism by suing its critics, the suit has if anything stimulated further press curiosity about the business’s practices. (Jori Finkel, “Art Auctions on Cruise Ships Lead to Anger, Accusations and Lawsuits”, New York Times, Jul. 16). More: Donn Zaretsky, Art Law Blog.

The Ninth Circuit has upheld a jury’s $15 million award to three Los Angeles Police Department officers who said they were wrongly arrested and made scapegoats in the notorious Rampart evidence-faking scandal. Two of the three officers who will share in the award were in fact convicted by a jury of obstruction of justice in an earlier case arising from the scandal, but the judge later concluded that she had committed an error at trial and set aside the verdict; the case was not reprosecuted. Which jury erred: the first, the second, or are there theories on which both might be accounted right? (Maura Dolan, “Federal appeals court upholds $15-million civil award for Rampart police officers”, Los Angeles Times, Jul. 15; Metropolitan News-Enterprise).

But Quebec courts have ruled that’s no reason Jean-Alix Miguel should lose his job as a teacher at a Montreal vocational school. Miguel spent seven years in prison for the murder. (Julia Kilpatrick, “Law says convicted killers can teach and practise law — but experts disagree”, Canwest/Victoria (B.C.) Times Colonist, Jul. 13)(via Wingless).

Federal civil rights enforcers wouldn’t be crazy enough to wreak havoc in science programs the way they’ve wrought havoc in men’s college athletic programs, would they? Don’t assume they wouldn’t. (John Tierney, “A New Frontier for Title IX: Science”, New York Times, Jul. 15).

The ruling (Slashdot) seems relatively unsurprising given the favorable posture of U.S. law toward online middlemen like eBay, but a number of readers have asked about how it relates to the ruling the other week by a French court in favor of much more sweeping claims against eBay by luxury goods maker LVMH (Louis Vuitton Moët Hennessy). The answer, unfortunately, may not be simply that the various eBay sites have to follow different local rules depending on where they are based or to whom a purchase is being shipped. Per Roger Parloff’s Fortune piece, the earlier ruling “applies to all eBay sites worldwide to the extent that they are accessible from France, and not merely to the company’s French site at ebay.fr, according to [French lawyers on both sides]“.

• New York attorney suspended from practice after attempting as guardian to extract $853,000 payday from estate of Alzheimer’s victim [ABA Journal, Emani Taylor]
• Bought a BB gun to fend off squirrels, now his 20-year-old son faces three years for bare possession [MyCentralJersey.com via Zincavage]
• U.K.: “Sports clubs face being put out of business following a landmark court ruling forcing them to be liable for deliberate injuries caused by their player to an opponent.” [Telegraph]
• Prosecutors in Norwich, Ct. still haven’t dropped their case against teacher Julie Amero in malware-popup smut case. Why not? [TalkLeft, earlier]
• Dealership protection laws, deplored earlier in this space, work to make a GM bankruptcy both likelier and messier [The Deal]
• Strange new respect for talk show host Joe Scarborough in quarters where conservatives are ordinarily disliked? Some of us saw that coming [NYMag]
• Following Rhode Island rout of lawsuit against lead-paint makers, Columbus, Ohio drops its similar case [PoL, Akron Beacon Journal editorial]
• In latest furor over free speech and religious sensitivity in Europe, Dutch authorities have arrested cartoonist “suspected of sketching offensive drawings of Muslims and other minorities” [WSJ; "Gregorius Nekschot"]