Trend: patent lawyers emerge as their own parties in interest. [Bloomberg/BW via PoL] Earlier here and here.
Archive for June, 2010
“Are Cameras the New Guns?”
“In response to a flood of Facebook and YouTube videos that depict police abuse, a new trend in law enforcement is gaining popularity. In at least three states, it is now illegal to record any on-duty police officer.” [Gizmodo]
Suing unauthorized movie sharers, cont’d
“In the past five months, Virginia-based law firm Dunlap, Grubb, & Weaver has filed suits against thousands of individuals accused of illegally downloading independent films—an operation that could yield the firm and its clients more than $19 million in damages.” Doing business as U.S. Copyright Group, the firm subpoenas ISPs to obtain IP addresses of illegal sharers “and threatens to sue each person for $150,000 unless they agree to a $1,500 to $2,500 settlement fee.” [ABA Journal] Earlier here, etc.
“Why are so many Jersey moms having C-sections?”
Go ahead, guess. [Morristown, N.J. Daily Record]
Claim: Citibank fired me for being too attractive
Debrahlee Lorenzana of Queens, N.Y. says managers at Citibank considered her turtlenecks and tailored pencil skirts “too distracting” and asked her to stop wearing them. When she said that other employees wore similar garb, per her court papers, she was told that wasn’t relevant “as their general unattractiveness rendered moot their sartorial choices, unlike plaintiff.” [NY Post] More: Ted at PoL citing earlier coverage of Lorenzana’s lawyer in this space; Above the Law.
Drop-side crib ban: a regulatory taking?
Reader Chaim Gordon, a Georgetown 2L and former clerk with the Institute for Justice, cc’d us on an excerpted email to call our attention to
… a potential rule by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) or legislation by congress (S. 3400, H.R. 5386), see, e.g. (PDF), banning “the sale, manufacture, distribution, and use in public facilities of drop-side cribs.” As a parent, I feel violated (not really, because I own two such cribs already), and as a multiple-drop-side-crib-owner, I feel robbed.
I have been following this story for over a year now, and it seems to me that this rule/legislation is likely to implemented (I think that a rule is more likely than a bill). Originally, I thought that this ban was an effort by the crib manufacturers to reduce potential liability without losing market share by way of voluntary action. I now think that something more sinister is at work here. I now think that the manufacturers want to increase demand for their product by taking a large portion of the used-crib market/family-gift competition out of the picture. (Drop-side cribs used to comprise around 50% of the new crib market, and now, because of CPSC warnings and voluntary measures, that percentage has dropped to around 20%.) This of course comes at the expense of the innocent parents who may have been counting on selling their used cribs or giving their used cribs to family members (and at the expense of parents who will have to pay more for a used/new crib). Personally, I have never heard of a regulation that limited the rights of consumers to resell (or give away) their legitimately purchased, but now considered deficient, product (consider used cars without airbags).
Salt and the taste of food
Even in the midst of a crusade by its editors and the city’s mayor to attach odium to sodium, the New York Times can’t help reporting on some of the practical complications for those trying to make food palatable.
Judge OKs suit against Bacardi over flaming rum display
“A woman who claims she was severely burned when a bottle of Bacardi 151 rum caught fire during a restaurant bartender’s pyrotechnic display has won her attempt to proceed with a personal injury and products liability action against Bacardi and the restaurant.” [Walder, NYLJ]
June 3 roundup
- I’ve got a new post at Cato at Liberty tying together prosecutors’ demands for business forfeiture for immigration violations with proposals to criminalize employee misclassification;
- I can’t believe it’s not a lawsuit: margarine class action melts away [Cal Biz Lit]
- Guess what, your asbestos trial is scheduled in 11 days [Korris, MC Record]
- “This website has to be removed”: mayor of Bordentown, N.J. wants to shut down online critic [Citizen Media Law]
- What is a think tank and what does it do? I and others contribute answers at Allen McDuffee’s Think Tanked blog;
- No surprise here: Insurer offers policy to cover things that go wrong in medical tourism, but won’t cover USA residents or facilities [Treatment Abroad via White Coat]
- Pennsylvania law curbing med-mal forum-shopping disappoints lawyers who used to head for Philly or Wilkes-Barre [Sunbury, Pa. Daily Item via, again, White Coat]
- New Haven pizzeria busted: owners let their kids work at restaurant [Amy Alkon]
Babysitter and mom to pay $1.1 million in drowning death
“A Connecticut teenager and her mother have agreed to pay $1.1 million to the family of a toddler who drowned while the girl was baby-sitting.” No criminal charges were filed in the Cheshire, Ct. case. The family named the teenager’s mother as an additional defendant “because she allegedly recommended her daughter to baby-sit.” [WINS.com] Earlier, a 2009 New Haven Register story reported that the family also intended to sue the town of Cheshire because the teenager had taken a babysitting class under its auspices, and because the mother had gotten to know the family in her capacity as the children’s teacher. However, according to the Waterbury Republican-American, court records “do not indicate a lawsuit against the town has been filed.”