- AT&T sued for $1 billion for allegedly misclassifying managers [Hyman, American Lawyer]
- Shaken-baby-syndrome angle deserved more attention in Baucus-girlfriend-for-U.S.-Attorney flap [Kos, Freeland, earlier]
- Awful: “Holocaust Denier Sues Survivor” [South Florida Sun-Sentinel via Faces of Lawsuit Abuse “worst lawsuits of 2009” poll which you can take here]
- Bizarre new twist in rogue Philly cop unit story [Balko, earlier here, here, etc.]
- More on the first “Bruno” lawsuit against Sacha Baron Cohen [Lowering the Bar, earlier]
- False accusation as academic career booster: “The Rot at Duke” [Stuart Taylor, Jr., National Journal]
- Claim: Netflix recommendation algorithm contest exposed a subscriber’s privacy to her detriment [Singel, Wired]
- No “Continuing Duty to Investigate Accuracy” of Newspaper Article Posted on Web Site [Volokh on Jenzabar case, earlier here and here]
Archive for 2009
Quoted in Investors Business Daily
Sean Higgins’ article quotes me today on the lameness of the Reid health bill’s allocation of $50 million to liability demonstration projects carefully screened to avoid anything that might bother the trial bar. (Earlier here and at Point of Law.) I also joined Mike Rosen on his radio show today to talk about the provision’s political role as a fig leaf for Democratic members who feel they need to say back home that they made some gesture on this topic.
Illegal fee-splitting, “outrageous” courtroom behavior
They’ve contributed to a recommended three-year suspension for San Francisco attorney Philip Kay. “Kay rose to fame with the Baker & McKenzie suit, earning him a reputation as the go-to plaintiff lawyer for sexual harassment suits.” [Mike McKee/The Recorder, California Civil Justice]
More: Via a commenter, this is said to be the official statement released by the office of Philip Edward Kay:
“This decision admits it used default, as punishment, in violation of Business & Professions Code §6068(i), because I asserted constitutional and statutory rights of attorney client privilege and work product before answering questions, and demanded the right to have these issues heard and determined by an article VI court of general jurisdiction to determine whether the questions sought privileged information, pursuant to State Bar Rules. The State Bar Court did this knowingly to allow the Office of Chief Trial Counsel the ability to lie about what the Superior Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court found in their orders and opinions regarding these important civil rights cases.
In these matters, only after the trial judges were reversed on appeal and disqualified, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §§170, et seq., did they claim misconduct. So, either these judges lied in their orders denying misconduct, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §657(1) – “irregularities in the proceedings,” OR they lied in their testimony in the State Bar trial. This will create an uncertain and chilling effect by allowing unfit and disgruntled judges to lie about the record and impugn lawfully obtained civil rights verdicts, which have been upheld by the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. The State Bar Court has allowed these disqualified judges to attack and undermine the very verdicts, which, they could not touch in the trial court under statutory and case law in California.”
Airline turbulence injury blamed on weather forecasters
“Two Alaska Airlines flight attendants who were injured when a 2007 flight from Seattle to California encountered turbulent air have filed a legal claim against a national weather forecasting service and against the U.S. government.” [Seattle Times/Belleville News-Democrat]
“4-year-old survives being hit by train”
Perhaps the most urgent question raised by this Atlanta Journal-Constitution story is not: how did Elijah Anderson manage to emerge from such a collision sufficiently unscathed to resume life as a normal kid, aside from a scar? Nor is it: why is his mother, represented by attorney Fred Lerner, planning to sue railroad CSX despite an investigative report exonerating the railroad and the general principle that right of ways are not for trespassing? No, the real question is: whose idea was it to take that camera shot of him on the tracks?
“Suing to Get More Time on Exams”
A suit against Princeton is the latest in a long succession to make headlines. [Kerr, Volokh]
December 21 roundup
- “CBO Stands By Its Report: Tort Reform Would Save Billions” [ShopFloor; our weekend post on what actually wound up in Reid bill]
- “Indianapolis Tacks on Steep Fines for Challenging Traffic Tickets” [Balko]
- “Fugitive Located Inside Homeland Security Dept. Office” [Lowering the Bar]
- Assumption of risk? New York courts field legal complaints over mosh dance injuries [Hochfelder]
- Company claiming patent on Ajax web technique is suing lots of defendants [W3C, ImVivo via @petewarden]
- Why Arizona voters still back Sheriff Joe [Conor Friedersdorf/Daily Dish, von Spakovsky/NRO (deploring “persecution” of Arpaio), Greenfield]
- “Are Breast Implants and Donated Organs Marital Assets?” [Carton, Legal Blog Watch]
- “Disbarment Looms for First Attorney Convicted Under N.J. Anti-Runner Law” [NJLJ]
“Applying to Law School? Please Reconsider!”
“To those prospective law students applying to law school as a fallback in a bad economy, or because you want three more years to figure out what to do with your life: please save yourself time, money, and a huge amount of stress.” [Aaron Street, Lawyerist]
Legal in Canada, illegal in U.S.
More about the toy-in-chocolate Kinder Surprise [CanWest via Free-Range Kids; earlier, related]
P.S. In comments, Moriarty notes an instance in which various brands of American soda pop turned out to be illegal to sell in Canada (even aside from their lack of French-language labeling).
Chuck Yeager publicity rights suits, cont’d
The famed test pilot and sound-barrier-breaker continues to obtain courtroom traction for some debatable legal theories: “U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell dashed AT&T’s hopes of avoiding a trial in a decision that inexplicably grants a historic achievement the same legal protection as an artistic work or a consumer product.” [Matthew Heller, On Point News; earlier here and here]