Overlawyered: Chronicling The High Cost Of Our Legal System

Archive for April, 2006

Update: CAIR using litigation to silence critics?

The Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has settled its Canadian lawsuit against the Web site Anti-Cair-net.org, the Canadian terrorism expert David Harris, writer David Frum, and the National Post. The settlement is secret, but there was no retraction of the claim that CAIR is a “terrorist-supporting front organization . . .founded by Hamas supporters” that aims “to make radical Islam the dominant religion in the United States.” David Frum has details in the April 25 National Post, and expresses optimism that free criticism of terrorism supporters can now take place.

Update: As Bob B points out in the comments, elsewhere in the blogosphere, Israpundit, LGF, and Powerline. Daniel Pipes also writes with extensive detail. It reasonably appears CAIR dropped the suit, to avoid submitting to discovery: an important lesson for every libel plaintiff. Three cheers for Greenberg Traurig LLP, which did pro bono work that was actually pro bono.

Filed under: , , , ,

Center for Justice & Democracy and Americans for Insurance Reform

Martin Grace and I have written a Liability Outlook for AEI looking at the last several years of CJD/AIR studies on medical malpractice. The conclusion? “In many ways, the problem with AIR’s reports is a perfect microcosm of what doctors find most distasteful about the liability system: a trial-lawyer mentality that cherry-picks facts and twists data to reach knee-jerk conclusions under the guise of a false science.” See also Jim Copland’s dissection of one such study at Point of Law on Jul. 8.

We look forward to Kevin Drum giving this paper the same deference he credulously gave AIR’s last bogus report.

One flaw of the paper is that we didn’t include the story of “Bob,” the dummy literally used to scapegoat insurance-company executives by CJD at an ATLA conference. For other CJD shenanigans, see Dec. 23, 2004 and Mar. 19, 2004. (Cross-posted at Point of Law.)

Filed under: , , , ,

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t files: sunscreen edition

If there is anything behind that sunscreen class action seeking damages because sunscreen manufacturers comply with warning label regulations, it’s because the FDA refuses to approve Mexoryl, a sunscreen ingredient widely used in Canada and Europe that protects against UV-A rays. (Mike Thomas, “Not legal — but best thing under the sun”, Orlando Sentinel, Apr. 23).

Filed under: , ,

“The U.S. Senate Takes On Medical Malpractice Reform”

I’m moderating a panel with this title Monday afternoon at 3 at AEI.

The U.S. Senate has announced that it will be debating new legislation to reform America’s medical malpractice law in early May. Is the Senate likely to pass useful reforms? What types of reform should they consider? What is the appropriate role of the federal government in addressing the issue and what are the potential conflicts between the federal government and the states?

At this AEI event, a distinguished group of panelists will discuss the questions surrounding federal medical malpractice reform. The panel will include Michael S. Greve, the John G. Searle Scholar at AEI and director of the institute’s Federalism Project; George L. Priest, the John M. Olin Professor of Law and Economics at Yale Law School; and Dr. Stuart Weinstein, the current chairman of Doctors for Medical Liability Reform and the Ignacio V. Ponseti Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery at the University of Iowa.

Admission is free.

Filed under: , ,

Was the Garza Vioxx case fraudulent?

That’s what overwhelming evidence seems to suggest, I write in Point of Law. I ask: does anyone want to claim that the Garza case was an example of the jury system working well?

Also there: Michael Krauss and I criticize the Ninth Circuit’s command to Los Angeles that the Eighth Amendment prohibits them from arresting homeless people in Skid Row for their conduct; why you can’t believe everything you quoted from plaintiffs’ lawyers in the press; Maryland lead paint legislation; and who really outspends whom in ballot battles.

Filed under: ,

Model railroader sent $203k patent-infringement bill

Ben Jacobsen, a model railroad hobbyist, wrote open-source software to allow one to connect a computer to their model railroad and control trains with it. KAM Industries, which makes commercial software to do the same thing, has been having their lawyers send him scare letters, including a bill for $203,000 for a license, and filing an FOIA request with his academic sponsor. Jacobsen believes the patent is invalid, and claims to have made his software publicly available before KAM filed for the patent in 2002. (Lenford blog; Jacobsen correspondence).

Filed under: ,

Hamby v. Daimler/Chrysler

Roberto Martinez was washing Lori Hamby’s used 1991 Dodge Caravan while Hamby’s two-year-old daughter, Mary Madison Hamby Garcia, was playing inside of the vehicle by herself. The van was parked on top of a long driveway and the emergency brakes off. The key in the ignition in the “on” position so he could play the radio; the doors were open so he could vacuum the vehicle. Martinez was retrieving Windex fifteen feet away when Hamby apparently dislodged the automatic transmission from park. With the ignition key-lock the disabled, the vehicle hurtled down the driveway, killing Hamby when it struck a tree, jarring her from the vehicle, and pinning her beneath the tire, where she died of asphyxiation compression.

This is, an Atlanta jury held, 51% Chrysler’s fault. The theory on which the jury ruled in favor of the plaintiff is on the theory that Chrysler failed to adequately warn of the risk of leaving children unattended in vehicles with the key in the ignition—even though Hamby’s mother, Lori Hamby, only “glanced” through the owner’s manual, which did warn against it. Madison Hamby, who was dead on the scene, was awarded $2.25 million for pain and suffering on top of the $2.25 million for wrongful death. The jury ruled for Chrysler on the funeral expenses, however. Chrysler is appealing. (Greg Land, “DaimlerChrysler to Appeal $3.4M Awarded in Minivan Accident”, Fulton County Daily Report, Mar. 6 (via Prince); DeeAnn Durbin, “DaimlerChrysler ordered to pay family in minivan lawsuit”, AP/Detroit News, Mar. 3; Hamby v. DaimlerChrysler, No. 1:03CV:0937-CAP (N.D. Ga.)).

Filed under: , , ,

BREAKING: California Supreme Court throws out “Friends” sexual harassment suit

We’ve been covering the case with disbelief since 2004 (see Feb. 15 and links therein). Hooray for common sense.

David Bernstein or Eugene Volokh will no doubt have apt commentary at Volokh’s blog. (Update: Advantage Bernstein!)

Lyle v. Warner Brothers Television Productions:

“Based on the totality of the undisputed circumstances, particularly the fact the Friends production was a creative workplace focused on generating scripts for an adult-oriented comedy show featuring sexual themes, we find no reasonable trier of fact could conclude such language constituted harassment directed at plaintiff because of her sex within the meaning of the [California Fair Employment and Housing Act].”

(via Bashman).

Filed under: