Overlawyered: Chronicling The High Cost Of Our Legal System

Liability roundup

  • Another dubious lawsuit blaming terrorism on social media from law firm with phone number for a name [Tim Cushing]
  • Courts reverse two big talc/baby powder jury verdicts against Johnson & Johnson [Tina Bellon and Nate Raymond, Reuters ($417 million, California); Insurance Journal ($72 million, Missouri)]
  • “US-Based Tech Companies Subject to Worldwide Jurisdiction as Judicial Comity Takes a Back Seat” [Moin Yahya, WLF on Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Google v. Equustek Solutions]
  • Richard Epstein wrote the Encyclopedia of Libertarianism’s entry on liability, tort and contract;
  • Asbestos: “Judges and juries should learn about a plaintiff’s entire exposure history so they can apportion liability appropriately.” [Phil Goldberg, Forbes]
  • Study of contingent fee litigation in New York City: few cases resolved on dispositive motions, lawyers nearly always take the maximum one-third permitted by law [Eric Helland et al., forthcoming Vanderbilt Law Review/SSRN]

Filed under: , , , , , ,

2 Comments

  • What’s the difference between a court ordering google to block/remove worldwide and a US court ordering them to search their repositories in foreign countries for responsive data?

    • By cecil

  • Talc on the coochie not causing ovarian cancer is pretty settled science (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3621109/).

    But even if there were a small increase in risk, but still an order of magnitude less than the normal background risk, it is impossible to ascribe a greater likelihood than not (50%) standard of certainty.

    • By gasman