Thus argues a lawsuit filed by James Bogden against four restaurants in Alexandria, Va., which “seeks to require the restaurants to become smoke-free, arguing that they must accommodate Bogden’s disability, coronary artery disease, and eliminate secondhand smoke so he can eat at them. Each of the restaurants allows smoking in designated areas.” (Jerry Markon, “Man With Heart Condition Wants Smoke-Free Eateries”, Washington Post, Jan. 31).
Archive for January, 2008
4,896 opt-outs in Sears tippy-stove class action
An extraordinary number of consumers asked to be excluded from the class action settlement over Sears kitchen stoves that are allegedly too prone to tip when an opened oven door is leaned on. With humor quaint, the Chamber-backed Madison County Record reports on the reaction of class action lawyer Stephen Tillery:
At a Jan. 15 settlement hearing, Tillery interpreted the widespread rejection as a sign that he drafted a successful class notice.
“People read their mail,” he told Circuit Judge Barbara Crowder. “There was no problem with notice.”
(Steve Korris, “Consumer groups ‘ecstatic’ over Sears settlement, despite opt out of 4,896 stove owners”, Madison County Record, Jan. 24).
Plaintiff’s attorneys are slated to pocket $17 million in fees, which Tillery describes as modest compared to “the fund of monies made available to the class” by the troubled retailer, which he estimates at $500 million. “Made available” is of course a term of art, and it is anyone’s guess as to how many class members will actually take the time and trouble to file for refunds of up to $100 on old stoves. Inevitably, however, last year’s Sears wheel alignment class settlement comes to mind (see May 17 and Jul. 31, 2007). In that settlement the lawyers projected that consumers would redeem millions of dollars in coupons (and used that as the basis for their fee calculations), but the actual sum redeemed turned out to be $2,402.
“Katrina Suit Vs. Army Corps Dismissed”
Whatever the failings of the Army Corps of Engineers, the Flood Control Act of 1928 makes clear that federal taxpayers cannot be forced to pay through litigation for the catastrophic collapse of the levees, so there goes the multi-trillion-dollar class action. (Cain Burdeau and Michael Kunzelman, AP/Forbes, Jan. 30). Update: That wasn’t the last word, though: later rulings allowed suits against the Army Corps to go forward.
January 30 roundup
- Vioxx settlement is good for Merck and the trial lawyers suing it, the price being paid in legal ethics [Gryphon/City Journal]
- Australia: will-contest lawyers “will have their fees capped after a string of cases where the bill has exceeded the final inheritance.” [Sydney Morning Herald]
- ADA obliges golf courses, at least Marriott’s, to furnish accessible carts to disabled golfers, federal judge rules [Egelko, SF Chronicle]
- Henry Fonda/Sidney Lumet jury-deliberation classic Twelve Angry Men normally spoken of in tones of reverence. But what’s this? [Leo McKinstry, U.K. Spectator; Gracchi, Westminster Wisdom]
- Columnist and talk show host Michael Smerconish, himself former trial lawyer, is among latest to be sued by inmate/fantasist J*nath*n L** R*ch*s [Philadelphia Inquirer; earlier]
- Biggest-ever EEOC settlement for individual racial discrimination will bring Lockheed Martin electrician $2.5 million [Reuters/NYT]
- U.K.: Coast guard wins award for saving teen from cliff, then loses job because he didn’t follow prescribed health and safety precautions [Times Online, Sun]
- Lawsuit by baseball pros who missed out on big careers because they never abused steroids? [RedBirdsFan]
- Until Sarkozy, French heads of state liked to cancel outstanding parking tickets on taking office; contrast with American practice of pardons as departing Presidential gesture [Rittelmeyer/Cigarette Smoking Blog]
- New at Point of Law: Ted on med-mal statistics; Prof. Richard Nagareda on recognizing that mass torts are lawyer-driven; voter intimidation and union card check; state AGs and letters of marque and reprisal; Prof. Michael Krauss on thread-count class action; IRBs vs. hospital safety; Ted’s continuing coverage of the Vioxx settlement; and much more.
- OSHA backs down from its plan to regulate hazards like trippable power cords and rickety chairs in telecommuters’ home offices [eight years ago on Overlawyered]
Jello wrestling and assumption of risk
NYU student Avram Wisnia was “horsing around a kiddie pool filled with gelatin” at a dorm party in 2004 when he was pushed and broke his hip. A judge has now ruled he cannot sue the university for allowing the event and having the school food service furnish the gelatin, the risks of such a recreation being obvious enough to put him on notice. (“No Go In Jell-o Wrestling Lawsuit Against NYU”, AP/WNBC, Jan. 29).
Sued for encouraging user-generated content
Suits by businesses over their competitors’ advertising are a staple for us, but this one has a somewhat new wrinkle:
Quiznos, the toasted-sandwich chain, [invited] the public to submit homemade commercials in a contest intended to attack a top rival, Subway. The contest rules made it clear that the videos should depict Quiznos sandwiches as “superior” to Subway’s.
Subway promptly sued Quiznos and iFilm, the Web site owned by Viacom that ran the contest, saying that many of the homemade videos made false claims and depicted its brand in a derogatory way. Subway is also objecting to ads that Quiznos itself created, showing people on the street choosing Quiznos over Subway.
The dispute over an ad is fairly standard — companies often sue one another over advertising claims — but the video contest raises a novel legal question: Quiznos did not make the insulting submissions, so should it be held liable for user-generated content created at its behest? …
If Subway wins, advertisers and media companies may find themselves liable for false advertising claims made by consumers who participate in their contests.
(Louise Story, “Can a Sandwich Be Slandered?”, New York Times, Jan. 29).
Neuborne dispute not over after all
Professor Burt Neuborne finally received the $3.1 million he requested for achieving a $1.25 billion tax-free settlement of claims brought by Holocaust survivors against Swiss banks. The controversy isn’t over, however; Neuborne has made a standard request for interest (another $300,000), and there is much wailing and gnashing of teeth. [Law Blog; NY Sun; earlier on Overlawyered]
Professor Neuborne’s fee request is based on the hours actually spent on seven years of complex international litigation (29 formal proceedings and 16 successful Second Circuit appeals), and amounts to less than 1% of the amount recovered. There is no evidence that Professor Neuborne inflated his hours. If all contingent-fee requests were as reasonable as Professor Neuborne’s, reformers would have a lot less to complain about.
Milberg Weiss scandal: plaintiff-for-pay sentenced
Elderly (80) and ailing, retired entertainment lawyer Seymour Lazar drew an unusually light sentence of six months home detention after having “pled guilty to taking secret payments from Milberg Weiss for helping to bring dozens of securities lawsuits by serving as a plaintiff or arranging for his relatives to do so. Three former Milberg partners, William Lerach, David Bershad, and Steven Schulman, have also pled guilty in the scheme,” while the law firm itself and founder Mel Weiss continue to fight the charges and are expected to face trial later this year. “According to a statement from the prosecution, [federal judge John] Walter said he would have sentenced Lazar to a substantial prison term if he were younger and healthier.” (Josh Gerstein, New York Sun, Jan. 29).
Walter Dellinger as Hillary’s AG?
That’s the most favorable thing I’ve heard about Hillary Clinton in quite a while; naturally, it’s provoking heartburn in some quarters where Dellinger is viewed as neither leftist enough nor pro-litigation enough. (Stephanie Mencimer, Mother Jones blog, Jan. 28).
Mississippi: “Feds expand bribery investigation”
* “The FBI is expanding its probe into Mississippi’s judicial bribery scandal to examine other cases involving Hinds County Circuit Judge Bobby DeLaughter and his former boss, longtime District Attorney Ed Peters.” The pair surfaced in the Scruggs annals not long ago when Joey Langston pleaded guilty to involvement in a 2006 scheme to get DeLaughter to rule in Scruggs’s favor in a fee lawsuit, which allegedly included the funneling of $1 million of Scruggs’s money to Peters, who was viewed as close to the judge. (Jerry Mitchell, Jackson Clarion Ledger, Jan. 28). Rumors have been rife that Peters, DeLaughter or both may be cooperating with authorities, which might strengthen prosecutors’ hand in securing further evidence of the scheme.
* Perhaps relatedly, to quote Folo’s contributor NMC, “In the case against Dickie Scruggs over allegations of bribing Judge Lackey, the prosecution has filed a Notice of Intent to Introduce ‘similar acts evidence pursuant to Rule 404(b), Fed. R. Evid., at the trial’”. See Patsy R. Brumfield, “Prosecutors ready to say bribery attempts aren’t anything new”, Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal, Jan. 28.
* With what might seem like startlingly bad timing, Scruggs chum/novelist (and campaign donation co-bundler, if that’s the right term) John Grisham is just out with a new fiction entitled The Appeal, whose thesis, to judge by Janet Maslin’s oddly favorable review in the Times, is that the real problem with the Mississippi judicial system is that salt-of-the-earth plaintiff’s lawyers are hopelessly outgunned in the task of trying to get friendly figures elected to judgeships to sustain the large jury verdicts they win. One wonders whether any of Maslin’s editors warned her about recent news events — she doesn’t seem aware of them — that suggest that the direst immediate problems of the Mississippi judiciary might not relate to populist plaintiff’s lawyers’ being unfairly shut out of influence. Of course it’s possible she’s not accurately conveying the moral of Grisham’s book, and if so I’m not likely to be the first to find out about it, since I’ve never succeeded in reading more than a few pages of that popular author’s work. By the way, if you’re wondering which character in the novel Grisham presents as the “hothead with a massive ego who hated to lose,” yep, it’s the out-of-state defendant.