January 18 roundup

  • Protection of ugly garage views? Garrison Keillor vs. neighbors in St. Paul, Minn. [NYTimes]
  • If you’re a lawyer who practices before the south Florida bench, it’s not a recommended career move to use a blog to call one of its judges an “evil, unfair witch” [WSJ Law Blog]
  • Nonprofit sleep-off center that takes in drunks sued after rescuing man who then succeeds in laying his hands on more liquor and drinking himself to death [Anchorage Daily News]
  • New Starbucks offering of “skinny” drinks “could easily be considered a form of size discrimination” and lead to litigation, complains ticked-off barista [StarbucksGossip]
  • Appearance of impartiality? West Virginia high court judge cavorted on Riviera with coal exec whose big case was pending before his court [Liptak/NYT] Update: Now recused, per WV Record.
  • Retired drug enforcement officers sue Universal Studios, saying they were defamed as a group by “American Gangster” [MSNBC]
  • Not much likelihood of confusion: shirtmaker Lacoste can’t keep two dentists in Cheltenham, England from using toothy crocodile as logo for their practice [Reuters]
  • People seized randomly off street for compulsory jury duty in St. Johnsbury, Vt. and Greeley, Colo. [AP/Findlaw via KipEsquire, Greeley Tribune]
  • Federal judge orders attorney Robert Arledge of Vicksburg, Miss. to pay $5.8 million in restitution after conviction for organizing bogus fen-phen claims [Clarion-Ledger; earlier]
  • Canada: abuser of crystal meth successfully sues her drug dealer [BBC]
  • Animal rights group tries to shut down “happy cows” ad campaign [three years ago on Overlawyered]


  • Why does there need to be “good judgment” in criticizing a judge? Judges are government officials, and can, and should, be criticized harshly. They are paid to get it right. When they don’t it is not unfair to point that out.

    There is a First Amendment in this country. You get to criticize government officials. And you get to do so in harsh terms.

  • Re: Garrison Keillor:

    The addition would nearly double the home’s square footage and, according to court papers, would “obstruct the access to light and air” that Mr. Keillor’s home enjoys and “impair or destroy protected historical resources.

    Most Minnesotans would agree that Garrison is himself a historical resource which needs protection. But not from the neighbor’s garage. Uff da.

  • Buried in all the comments following the WSJ Law Blog article about the wicked witch of Florida are several by none other than that OL favorite Jack Thompson. Three guesses (first two don’t count) which side Mr. Never-met-a-video-game-I-liked came down on.

  • […] Comments About Judge Are Protected Speech”, Daily Business Review, Jul. 16; earlier). To me, this seems rather to miss the point: sure, almost everyone but a member of the local bar […]