Admittdly, I dislike the lawsuit method of social control, but since it gets used so often (and almost always to societal detriment), I might as well enjoy it when it gets used to an end I like (for a change).

That is to say, if the method is going to be used (and IT IS, unfortuntately), it might as well be used to get something good rather than something bad.

But still… $85K? Well, at least it isn’t any bigger…

But there are a lot of people who need economical or contingent-fee representation in cases not normally associated with such fees. I think small business disputes and intellectual property (think small business whose trademark is infringed by a small business across town, e.g.) are two areas where people with valid claims are often priced out of the market. (Even though attorney fee statutes may apply.) Something that linked those people with lawyers willing to take on the engagement with an unconventional fee arrangement might really be worthwhile.

So if this is a correct quote, it seems to imply that owning private property with graffiti on it the crime. It does not imply that (in this case) there is any crime in applying graffiti to a public space.

“It would be a terrible public policy if when anybody filed a lawsuit, the other party … can turn around and sue for the distress the lawsuit has caused,” Turley says. After all, suits always cause distress, he says.

How in the world could this matter result in $65,000 in medical and legal damages in a little over a year?