Liability roundup

  • Entrepreneurs launch plaintiff’s insurance to cover costs of pursuing litigation, not quite same thing as the “legal expense insurance” commonly found in loser-pays jurisdictions [ABA Journal]
  • More on the class action procedure case Microsoft v. Baker, from the just-ended Supreme Court term [Federalist Society podcast with Ted Frank, earlier]
  • Why Bristol-Myers Squibb, the Supreme Court case on state court jurisdiction, “is one of the most important mass tort/product liability decisions ever” [James Beck/Drug & Device Law, earlier]
  • Sandy Hook massacre: “Newtown And Board Of Education Seek Dismissal Of Wrongful Death Lawsuit” [AP/CBS Connecticut]
  • Pennsylvania: “Evidence-Manipulation Claims Dog Asbestos Lawyer” [Lowell Neumann Nickey, Courthouse News] “California’s Latest Litigation Invitation: A Duty to Protect Against ‘Take-Home’ Exposure” [Curt Cutting, WLF]
  • It’s almost as if trial lawyers were in the driver’s seat of these ostensibly public actions: Tennessee counties’ opioids suit also seeks to strike down the state’s tort reform law [Jamie Satterfield, Knoxville News-Sentinel]


  • “… Claims dog asbestos lawyer”–
    For a moment there, I thought an underemployed staff lawyer at PETA was trying to open a new line of business…

  • Re Sandy Hook: The plaintiff’s lawyer said “We just want our children to come home at the end of the school day,” Papcsy said, noting the town’s motion was filed on what would have been Jesse Lewis’ 11th birthday.

    Here’s a novel idea – Why not sue the party responsible for the shooting? That is the shooter. To hold the school responsible for this is a perversion of law and logic.

    • “Why not sue the party responsible for the shooting?”


      1. the shooter doesn’t have any money.
      2. the shooter committed suicide at the end of his rampage.