The brutalist-modern Third Church of Christ Scientist is one of the most widely disliked buildings in Washington, D.C., not least by its own congregation, which groans at the impracticalities of maintaining the concrete monstrosity: “According to one church official, you’ve got to build scaffolding just to reach some of the [light] bulbs [to change them].” But Washington’s local architectural-preservation authorities forbid the congregants from replacing the building, which dates all the way back to 1971. (Charles Paul Freund, “A Brutalist Bargain”, American Spectator, Dec. 18).
Archive for December, 2007
Scruggs WSJ piece now a free link
Thank you, OpinionJournal.com, which has now published a free link for my Saturday op-ed laying out some of the story of the Scruggs indictments.
Update: N.M. pipeline rescuers can sue for emotional distress
Three years ago we prematurely reported that sanity had (as of that point) prevailed in the New Mexico case where firefighters and emergency medical personnel, otherwise uninjured, were seeking to sue El Paso Natural Gas over the emotional trauma of witnessing the disaster scene after a 2000 pipeline explosion. Earlier this month, however, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled the other way, poking a big hole in the “firefighters’ rule” which traditionally barred recovery by rescuers against those who cause accidents. Chief Justice Edward Chavez wrote that to throw out the emotional-distress suits would be to “reward reckless or intentional acts”. The suits now head to trial. (Stella Davis, “Responders can sue in pipeline explosion”, Carlsbad Current Argus, Dec. 5).
“Hundreds upon hundreds and hundreds of fake accidents”
Philadelphia authorities have indicted Center City lawyer D. Allen Litt and 14 others over what they say was a quarter-century-old scheme of bogus personal injury claims employing 100 runners and working with about ten physicians. Slip-falls were a favorite: “He would send his runners to look for cracks in sidewalks in front of businesses large and small, supermarkets, large drugstore chains, mom-and-pop stores, any commercial business whatsoever,” said Philadelphia D.A. Lynne Abraham. “The imposters would obtain medical care from physicians selected by Litt and rack up inflated medical bills via numerous visits to the Litt-selected doctors, the grand jury charged,” per the Legal Intelligencer. Some claimants had genuine injuries incurred elsewhere which they brought to the scene of the intended staging. “Abraham said Litt would pay people fees ranging from a couple of hundred to a thousand dollars to find the sites and stage the fake accidents. The lawsuits would yield thousands of dollars for Litt, officials said.” (Vernon Clark, “Lawyer charged with running 25-year fraud”, Philadelphia Inquirer, Dec. 12; Amaris Elliott-Engel, “Pa. Attorney Charged in Insurance Fraud Case”, The Legal Intelligencer, Dec. 13).
Senate Dems: Trial lawyers’ pockets more important than anti-terrorism legislation
Amid deep and growing divisions among Senate Democrats, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) last night abruptly withdrew [the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that would have also] granted the nation’s telecommunications companies retroactive immunity from lawsuits charging they had violated privacy rights.
(Jonathan Weisman and Paul Kane, “Telecom Immunity Issue Derails Spy Law Overhaul”, Washington Post, Dec. 18). Reid had previously promised to pass the bill this month, but a handful of Democratic senators, most notably Dodd and Kennedy, threatened to block the bill because of the immunity provision. Reid had the votes to pass it (a filibuster attempt failed 76-10), but chose not to. Earlier: Nov. 5 and Oct. 31.
Update: Were the government’s actions were illegal? Maybe, though reasonable minds can differ. But the question is different from the one of the dynamic consequences of finding private liability here. If corporations are held liable every time they agree to cooperate with the government on a national-security issue that is potentially ambiguous, they just won’t cooperate at all without a court order. Perhaps that is the rule we want going forward. But if so, that policy choice should be the decision of Congress, not of unaccountable trial lawyers—and if it is the rule Congress wants, they should state it explicitly, so voters can hold them accountable for the consequences, rather than hiding behind trial-lawyer surrogates that later reward them for the earmarks to the trial bar. Should trial lawyers make terrorism policy?
December 18 roundup
- “Of all the body parts to Xerox!” Another round of stories on efforts to reduce liabilities from office holiday parties [ABA Journal, Above the Law, and relatedly Megan McArdle]
- New edition of Tillinghast/Towers Perrin study on insurance costs of liability system finds they went down last year, which doesn’t happen often [2007 update, PDF]
- Vermont student sues Burger King over indelicate object found in his sandwich; one wonders whether he’s ruled out it being a latex finger cot, sometimes used by bakery workers [AP/FoxNews.com]
- Good discussions of “human rights commission” complaints against columnist Mark Steyn in Canada [Volokh, David Warren and again @ RCP, Dan Gardner; for a contrasting view, see Wise Law Blog]
- Having trousered $60-odd million in fees suing Microsoft in Minnesota and Iowa antitrust cases, Zelle Hofmann now upset after judge says $4 million in fees should suffice for Wisconsin me-too action [Star-Tribune, PheistyBlog]
- Australian rail operator will appeal order to pay $A600,000 to man who illegally jumped tracks, spat at ticket inspectors, hurt himself fleeing when detained [Herald Sun]
- Lawyers’ fees in Kia brake class action (Oct. 29, Oct. 30) defended by judge who assails honesty of chief defense witness [Legal Intelligencer]
- Who deserves credit for founding Facebook? Question is headed for court [02138 mag]
- Yes, jury verdicts do sometimes bankrupt defendants, as did this $8 million class action award against a Kansas City car dealer [KC Star, KC Business Journal]
- Dispute over Burt Neuborne’s Holocaust fees is finally over, he’ll get $3.1 million [NY Sun]
- So long as we’re only fifty votes behind in the race for this “best general legal blog” honor, we’re going to keep nagging you to vote for Overlawyered [if you haven’t already]
Christmas shopping suggestions
Always worth pointing out this time of year: if you use our Amazon bookstore to buy holiday presents, a portion of your shopping outlays go to support the work of this site. Better yet, why not buy your friends (or yourself?) some food for thought in the form of books and other products related to our themes here? Not to be excessively self-promotional, but my book The Rule of Lawyers of not long ago is once again relevant to current headlines in a big way, given the close look it takes at Mississippi’s Richard (Dickie) Scruggs and the tobacco and asbestos lawsuits that made his fortune. If you check the right-hand column of our front page, you’ll also see ShopThisBlog.com, which offers a thoughtfully designed and easy to use guide to buying many books mentioned in this space.
Another book we’ve had occasion to mention here (well before its publisher bought an ad!) is Adam Freedman’s well-received The Party of the First Part, on the oddities of the language we sometimes call “legalese” (Aug. 22). And don’t forget the much-acclaimed DVD A Lawyer Walks Into a Bar (Sept. 28), which includes me as an interviewee in the bonus material.
NJ Turnpike sues crash victims
After a press inquiry, the New Jersey Turnpike Authority abruptly changed its mind about suing the Ryan and Christmas families, who between them lost four family members in an August 2006 crash. (Kieran Crowley, “NJ Adds Insult to Injury”, New York Post, Dec. 17).
Sorry, but we can’t let you tape your package in our store
What if you hurt yourself? “One customer’s misfortune inspired an unnecessary rule at the expense of 10,000 others who aren’t clumsy and litigious.” (Ben McConnell, Church of the Customer blog, Dec. 17).
Scruggs case audio
The United States is in possession of a 90-minute “consensual recording” of four of the five defendants — it would appear that Timothy Balducci wore a mike into a meeting — as well as 124 intercepted phone conversations (Lotus/folo, WSJ law blog, Rossmiller).