“Blogs appear far more influential in the Democratic than the Republican party. With the waning influence of the labor movement — the blogs and the trial lawyers are picking up the slack as influential institutions.” — Marshall Wittman, Bull Moose Blog, Nov. 28.
Archive for 2005
Deep pocket files: Motor Coach Industries I-35 bus crash trial
A Temple church group chartered a bus from Central Texas Trails Inc. on Valentine’s Day 2003 to attend a Christian music concert in Dallas. It was raining when charter-bus driver Johnny Cummings approached an Interstate 35 traffic jam too fast, lost control of his tour bus, crossed a median, swerved into oncoming traffic, and collided with an SUV, killing five of his passengers. Cummings and the charter company declared bankruptcy, so 19 injured bus passengers and survivors sued Motor Coach Industries, the bus manufacturer, for its failure to include three-point seatbelts on its 1996-manufactured bus. The bus met federal safety standards, NHTSA has found that seatbelts on tour buses do not “enhance overall occupant protection,” and no tour buses sold in the US have seatbelts, but a McLennan County jury awarded $17.5 million anyway. Judge Jim Meyer allowed Houston attorney Thomas Brown to argue that a jury vote for the plaintiffs was a vote for the cause of safety. A second trial with a second set of plaintiffs from the bus accident remains to be scheduled. (Matt Joyce, “Jury awards bus crash victims $17.5 million”, Waco Tribune-Herald, Nov. 4).
Nanotech’s legal risks
They’re anything but infinitesimal, or so conferees were told recently:
“However,” Monica warns, “no industry — including the nanotechnology industry — is beyond the reach of American trial lawyers. Concerns about possible health and safety hazards posed by nanomaterials are being raised among labor unions and environmentalists; trial lawyers cannot be far behind. Some have even begun to compare nanotechnology to asbestos, a material plagued by $70 billion in litigation over the past three decades.”
Lawyer John C. Monica Jr. of Porter Wright Morris & Arthur in Cleveland, along with colleagues, wrote the paper, which was entitled “Preparing for Future Health Litigation: The Application of Product Liability Law to Nanotechnology.” (Keay Davidson, “Big troubles may lurk in super-tiny tech”, San Francisco Chronicle, Oct. 31)(more tech law coverage)(& welcome InstaPundit readers).
On the town
This evening I took advantage of the hospitality of the folks at TechnoLawyer.com who secured the use of a dandy bar in Tribeca for the launch of a new eBook they are giving away to their customers, “BlawgWorld 2006: Capital of Big Ideas“. The book is discussed at length over at Evan Schaeffer’s today by Ted, Mike Cernovich and others. I enjoyed meeting other guests, among them Bruce MacEwen of Adam Smith Esq. and Arnie Herz of LegalSanity, both of which blogs are deservedly popular among practicing lawyers.
“TV’s pitchmen in pinstripe suits”
Arizona Republic takes a look at lawyers’ advertising (Hal Mattern, Nov. 27).
Briefing in City of New York v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp.
The first battle over the constitutionality and scope of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act is taking place in Judge Weinstein’s courtroom in City of New York v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp.. The AEI Liability Project has the briefing available in the November 29 entry in its Documents in the News page. Previous coverage: Apr. 13, 2004, Nov. 9, and Nov. 25.
Tripped up by 10,000 rules
Our discussion of overcriminalization (Nov. 20) has got Coyote to thinking (Nov. 21) about some of the headaches involved in complying with labor and employment law:
Now, I’m not talking about chaining employees to the assembly line or even paying below the minimum wage. I am talking about $45,000 fines for not splitting the two portions of a Davis-Bacon wage out correctly on a pay stub or getting sued for not properly posting one of your required labor department posters or having a counter 1/2″ too high for ADA regulations.
Follow his links to learn about an instance in which labor regulators refused to concede that a camping business in a national forest qualified as recreational.
Roger Parloff on patent litigation
First BlackBerry, next eBay? As patent disputes threaten to shut down whole pillars of the electronic economy, the question becomes more urgent whether patent holders should be entitled to automatic injunctions against infringers. Abolishing the injunction entirely might be too radical, argues Fortune’s Roger Parloff; the better course may lie in giving judges more discretion. (“Pay Up — or You’re Done For”, Fortune, Dec. 12). More on the BlackBerry case: Oct. 11, May 2. And a news update: “Setback for BlackBerry maker”, Reuters/Money/CNN, Nov. 30.
Terrell Owens: Now Specter wants in
Sen. Arlen Specter has risen to the level of self-parody and “accused the NFL and the Philadelphia Eagles of treating Terrell Owens unfairly, and might refer the matter to the antitrust subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee.” The AP story quotes a couple of experts as noting that there isn’t an antitrust problem in much more polite terms than I would have. (AP/ESPN, Nov. 29 (hat-tip L.S.)). Owens seems to provoke a lot of silliness: see Nov. 24 and links therein.
L.A.: “Lawyer held in car crash fraud ring”
It’s not as if these fraud rings were anything new (more), but a few of the details this time are particularly piquant:
A lawyer recruited 29 people, including some from a Bible study class, to stage more than 60 automobile crashes on Los Angeles freeways and collected millions of dollars in bogus insurance claims, authorities said Wednesday.
Typically members of the ring would head out in two cars onto a freeway and box in an unsuspecting SUV or commercial truck, then slam on the brakes so as to cause an accident for which passengers in the lead car could file a legal claim.
Although no one was seriously injured in the accidents, one victim was forced to close his business after his truck was totaled, officials said….
Among those involved were members of a Bible study group from the Inland Empire, said Marty Gonzales, chief investigator for the California Department of Insurance….
Many of the suspects were illegal immigrants who were promised they would earn hundreds if not thousands of dollars, Gonzales said.
In reality, some were paid nothing….
According to the insurance commissioner’s office, [22-year-old Humberto] Carlon set up the accidents and Laufer [personal injury lawyer Bernard Laufer, 52, of Huntington Park] paid him a fee to represent the phony victims in claims against insurance companies….
Such crash rings are not new to Southern California.
A family of three burned to death on the Long Beach Freeway in 1996 in an accident linked to a crash ring.
(Amanda Covarrubias, Los Angeles Times, Nov. 24).