Archive for January, 2014

January 3 roundup

  • Taxpayers on hook: “N.J. boy left blind and brain-damaged after being beaten by father awarded $166M by jury” [Newark Star-Ledger]
  • “Psychic Love Spell Center stole my money, lawyer alleges in lawsuit” [Houston; ABA Journal]
  • “You can’t win these suits… Move on with your life.” Good advice for someone falsely accused of rape? [Roxanne Jones, CNN]
  • Critical look at California judge’s lead paint ruling [Daniel Fisher/Forbes, earlier here, here]
  • $6 check and apology over “F-word”: “Pub owner’s sarcastic response to Starbucks cease-and-desist letter goes viral” [ABA Journal]
  • Suburb doesn’t want to accept public transit, but feds force its hand by use of controversial disparate impact theory [Dayton Daily News]
  • Randy Barnett: libertarianism as a vehicle for moderation, toleration and social peace [Chapman Law Review/SSRN; one of my favorite academic papers from last year]

Utah women: we never authorized lawyer to file suit in our name

“A lesbian couple who married last week want a federal judge to throw out a lawsuit against the state and the LDS Church that listed their names without their knowledge or permission. … ‘Mr. Smay never had authorization, consent or permission from me or my wife to file a lawsuit on our behalf,’ Fowler wrote in a court declaration.” The couple had married following an unrelated ruling by a federal judge on a challenge to Utah marriage law, and had been the subject of Dec. 25 coverage in the Salt Lake Tribune newspaper, which one of the pair believes might have called them to the lawyer’s attention. [church-affiliated Deseret News, KSL, Religion Clause] For another instance in which someone complained of being named as a plaintiff in a lawsuit without their consent, see this 2007 item.

Update: court tosses suit; lawyer insists he doesn’t need couple’s permission to file suit, but other lawyers tell the Salt Lake Tribune he’s wrong.

Department of Labor vs. family farms, cont’d

Farms are not supposed to face OSHA regulation unless they have 10 employees, but the agency has tried to get around that rule by declaring that grain storage and handling facilities on farms aren’t really part of the farm. Now 43 Senators have signed a letter warning the agency to back off. [Future of Capitalism; another family farm labor controversy from last year]

British libel law reined in a bit

The country’s notoriously plaintiff-friendly law of defamation will be a tad less so under legislated reforms now taking effect. Under the Defamation Act 2013, complainants will need to show “serious harm,” peer-reviewed scientific publications and material published in the public interest will gain a new defense, a single-publication rule will be introduced, and new rules intended to combat libel tourism will exclude cases with little connection to England or Wales. [BBC]