- U. Miami: “Law School Email Draws Fire Amid Hotly Contested Retention Election for 3 Top Florida Judges” [ABA Journal, earlier on election]
- Janet Jenkins sues Liberty U. School of Law, charging assistance to custody-nappers; school describes suit as baseless [ABA Journal, earlier on Miller-Jenkins custody case]
- “Maybe a lawprof is not what you want in a politician. And yet, Bill Clinton was a lawprof. So was Hillary Clinton. And there are different types of lawprofs. They don’t all listen, give ground, and offer complex caveats!” [Ann Althouse]
- “Former law student became a chronic litigant” [Boston Globe]
- Andrew Morriss on Tamanaha’s Failing Law Schools [Liberty Law]
- “Institute for Humane Studies Webcast on the Pros and Cons of Law School” [Ilya Somin]
- Fred Rodell knew: reasons not to write law review articles [Matthew Salzwedel, Lawyerist] What a rising law professor should put in a book review [Pierre Schlag via Prof. Bainbridge]
- Bradley C.S. Watson on law school progressivism [National Review, pay site, mentions Schools for Misrule]
Archive for October, 2012
Update: New York high court rules 4-3 that lap dances are not “art”
Paul Caron, TaxProf, on one of the more closely watched tax rulings. Earlier here.
“‘Donations’ to state agency let landlords avoid charges”
Between 2006 and 2011 the Iowa Civil Rights Commission engaged in a practice of filing housing discrimination charges against landlords, which it would then settle through “donations” that went directly to the commission rather than the state’s general fund, reports Jason Clayworth at the Des Moines Register. “The requests came after sting operations in which representatives of the commission would, for example, pose as prospective tenants and tell landlords over the phone that they needed a service dog for anxiety reasons and quiz them as to whether a pet deposit would apply to them.”
“Try your hand at making six hundred dollars in some other way”
Via Futility Closet, a story of Abraham Lincoln and litigation:
Dear Herndon:
One morning, not long before Lincoln’s nomination — a year perhaps — I was in your office and heard the following: Mr. Lincoln, seated at the baize-covered table in the center of the office, listened attentively to a man who talked earnestly and in a low tone. After being thus engaged for some time Lincoln at length broke in, and I shall never forget his reply. ‘Yes,’ he said, ‘we can doubtless gain your case for you; we can set a whole neighborhood at loggerheads; we can distress a widowed mother and her six fatherless children and thereby get for you six hundred dollars to which you seem to have a legal claim, but which rightfully belongs, it appears to me, as much to the woman and her children as it does to you. You must remember that some things legally right are not morally right. We shall not take your case, but will give you a little advice for which we will charge you nothing. You seem to be a sprightly, energetic man; we would advise you to try your hand at making six hundred dollars in some other way.’
Yours,
Lord
“International monitors at US polling spots”
Great moments in international human rights: “United Nations-affiliated election monitors from Europe and central Asia will be at polling places around the U.S. looking for voter suppression activities by conservative groups … Liberal-leaning civil rights groups met with representatives from the OSCE this week.” OSCE stands for “Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), a United Nations partner on democratization and human rights projects.” [Alexander Bolton, The Hill]
More: Julian Ku writes that although the OSCE is transnational, it is not “U.N.-affiliated,” and notes that contrary to some speculation, the observers’ appearance was unrelated to a separate request to the U.N. by the NAACP asking it to regulate voting methods in the U.S.
“Chief Judge KOZINSKI, disagreeing with everyone”
A new type of Ninth Circuit opinion. [Joe Palazzolo, WSJ Law Blog]
Italy: scientists sent to prison for faulty earthquake predictions
“Six Italian scientists and an ex-government official have been sentenced to six years in prison over the 2009 deadly earthquake in L’Aquila. A regional court found them guilty of multiple manslaughter. Prosecutors had said the defendants gave a falsely reassuring statement before the quake after studying tremors that had shaken the city.” [BBC, earlier] More: Orac.
Speaking of science and the Italian courts, Italy’s Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a litigant claiming cellphone use caused his brain tumor; most authorities have found no such link [Telegraph]
The foreign policy debate
A few selected tweets:
MSNBC: Substance-wise, Romney “hugged Mr. Obama” on series of issues. And vice versa! Call it the Angry Hug debate.
— Walter Olson (@walterolson) October 23, 2012
So the greatest future foreign threat is affordable tires.
— Jesse Walker (@notjessewalker) October 23, 2012
DRONES = Dammit, Romney-Obama Not Even Separable
— Walter Olson (@walterolson) October 23, 2012
There are bigger policy differences between Obama ’08 & Obama 12, Primary Romney & Candidate Romney, than Obama & Romney. #debate
— Peter Jaworski (@petermjaworski) October 23, 2012
Cato’s group debate coverage (not including me this time) cato-at-liberty.org/live-blog-of-t…
— Walter Olson (@walterolson) October 23, 2012
And about the last debate:
Ames straw polls, nominating conventions, “fact-checking”: how journalists create news [Andrew Ferguson, Commentary] commentarymagazine.com/article/is-tha…
— Walter Olson (@walterolson) October 22, 2012
“The Fact-Checkers’ Conceit” [Jonathan Adler; Ramesh Ponnuru] volokh.com/2012/10/11/the…
— Walter Olson (@walterolson) October 18, 2012
Romney’s four worst moments at the debate, policy-wise [@capitalismnow] futureofcapitalism.com/2012/10/romney…
— Walter Olson (@walterolson) October 18, 2012
Pharmaceutical roundup
- False medical reports lead to echo-mill conviction [Drug and Device Law]
- Leads for sale in mass tort cases: Actos $450, Yaz $400, Yazmin $400, Ocella $425 [Ron Miller]
- Ninth Circuit: securities suit vs. pharmaceutical company can’t piggyback on allegations of flawed clinical trials [The Recorder]
- Dubious management idea: subordinate policy/legislative advocacy to corporate social responsibility (CSR) department [Susan Crowley/PharmExec]
- “Former Glaxo VP: ‘The Criminalization of the Practice of Law Is Here’” [WSJ interview with Lauren Stevens]
- Given the state’s legal climate, does it really make sense for a big pharmco to retain its headquarters in Pennsylvania? [Ted Frank] Sounds rather appetizing actually: defendant J&J said to have run into Louisiana home cooking [Eric Alexander, D&D Law]
- On the life-threatening shortages of sterile injectables [earlier here, etc.] here’s the official line of Margaret Hamburg’s FDA, as dutifully transcribed by the Times: if “nearly a third of the industry’s manufacturing capacity is off line because of quality issues,” it’s because that capacity had been operating in an recklessly unsafe manner, and it in no way reflects on the FDA’s stringent new GMP regulations on manufacturing processes, with which drug makers could easily comply were they not so inured to putting up with weevils, rust and urine on the production line. Note however this significant bit: “The shutdowns have contributed to a shortage of critical drugs, and [loosely state-regulated] compounding pharmacies have stepped into the gap as medical professionals scramble for alternative sources. But several serious health scares have been traced to compounding pharmacies in recent years,” including a deadly new meningitis outbreak. [Katie Thomas, NYT]
New Orleans Saints class action
“A New Orleans Saints fan named David Mancina has filed a putative class action against Roger Goodell and the NFL, alleging that Goodell and the league’s suspension of Saints players entitles Mancina and other Saints fans to damages from (I am not making this up) ‘the diminishment in the value of their tickets; their personal emotional reaction to the unwarranted penalties inflicted on their beloved team, players, coaches, and executives; and the deliberate reduction of the competitive capability of the Saints due to the selective gutting of the critical components needed to justify the loyalty of Plaintiff and the class.'” [Howard Wasserman, Prawfs, who does not think much of the suit, headlining it “Today in Sanctionable Lawsuits”]