More damning evidence on a subject on which there’s been plenty already (Sept. 6, 2001, Sept. 24, 2006, etc.; Oct. 31, 2006): “a study by the Federal Highway Administration and the Virginia Department documented a 12 percent increase in rear-enders at Northern Virginia intersections where cameras enforced red-light violations. Although proponents of cameras contend the number of such accidents decreases as motorists become used to this new enforcement technology, the study says that isn’t so. Meanwhile, simply extending the time that the traffic light stays yellow helps reduce violations and accidents. However, that solution isn’t necessarily popular with towns that see red-light tickets as a revenue source, the [Miami] Herald says.” (Martha Neil, “Traffic Cameras Mean More Rear-Enders”, ABA Journal, Oct. 31; Larry Lebowitz, “Red-light cameras a signal for war”, Miami Herald, Oct. 29).
Author Archive
“The world’s weirdest cases”
Columnist Gary Slapper of the U.K. Times gives his nominations of odd ones from around the world. Among them is a Gilbert-and-Sullivanish 1874 proceeding in which a Winnipeg magistrate served as judge in his own case on a charge of public intoxication (Nov. 5).
November 7 roundup
- “I’ve always thought that promoting yourself as a ‘Super Lawyer’ or ‘Best Lawyer’ was pathetic, self-aggrandizing and meaningless.” [Larry Bodine; Karen Donovan, Portfolio (“cheesiest”); ABA Journal]
- That big campaign by bossy public health groups and tobacco-suit veterans for legal restrictions on fat in the American diet is still with us, even as its scientific credibility falters [Tierney, NYT]
- “1,700 Connecticut Attorneys Suspended Over $110 Bill” — now that sounds like a bargain [ABA Journal]
- Blackwater meets Elmer Gantry? John O’Sullivan shouldn’t plan on being invited to the Edwards inaugural [NRO Corner]
- Nor would it be prudent to invite Felix Salmon and Ben Stein to the same dinner party [Portfolio; more]
- Truly dreadful idea from feminist Northwestern lawprof Kimberly Yuracko: constitution obliges states to ban sexist homeschooling [SSRN via Prawfsblawg; Serious Learning, Ragamuffin Studies, TalkToAction, Marcy Muser]
- New at Point of Law: some results of Tuesday’s election; employers whipsawed on risk of fetal injury; signs of exhaustion at long jury trials; wanna become a law professor?; 9/11 dust injury, or ground-up pills in his bloodstream?; more on Chevron/Texaco and the Ecuador Indians; dept. of New York Times self-parody; and more;
- Lawyer who sued McDonald’s over cheese-allergic client served cheeseburger (Aug. 10, Sept. 1) asks to be released from case, says he’s quitting law practice [LegalNewsLine]
- Of seven leading White House aspirants, all but McCain have law degrees, and all the other six but Romney practiced as lawyers [Liptak, NYT]
- UK: “A lorry driver sentenced to 150 hours’ community service for a drunken racist assault has been let off after probation chiefs claimed the punishment could breach EU working hours limits.” [Daily Mail]
- Notation on Scruggs’s court file: to be “kept away from the press” [five years ago on Overlawyered]
Lawyers: no harm in botching suit since it had no merit anyway
“A New York judge has permitted a legal malpractice suit to proceed against a group of personal injury lawyers who tried to argue that the medical malpractice suit they allegedly botched had no merit in the first place.” Morelli Ratner (of Benedict Morelli fame) and Schapiro & Reich had filed a suit on behalf of Victoria Kremen alleging failure to diagnose cancer. The suit was thrown out on statute-of-limitations grounds, but in her later action against the lawyers Kremen argued that they might have avoided the usual time limits by invoking certain exceptions to the statute. The lawyers proceeded to argue that Kremen’s suit was doomed anyway, but Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Emily Goodman was not impressed: “[S]uch arguments fly in the face of the fact that Defendants represented Plaintiffs for almost three years, presumably because they believed that the lawsuit had merit.” (Anthony Lin, Legal Malpractice Suit Against Personal Injury Lawyers Permitted to Go Forward”, New York Law Journal, Oct. 31).
The right to be injured, redux?
Power tools manufacturer Black & Decker Corp. rejected Victor Breehne for a ”highly wrist-sensitive job” at a Tennessee plant after medical tests suggested that Breehne was vulnerable to carpal-tunnel syndrome. Now he’s suing, charging that the rejection violates the Americans with Disabilities Act:
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has challenged the use of such tests, which aren’t uncommon in manufacturing settings, on ADA grounds. But it lost a federal lawsuit in 2001 against Rockwell Automation Inc. after that company denied jobs to 72 applicants at an Illinois plant.
(Allison Connolly, “B&D sued after it rescinds job offer”, Baltimore Sun, Oct. 16; “Man sues after job offer rescinded over carpal tunnel test”, Reliable Plant, Oct. 17). For the 2002 U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Echabazal v. Chevron, in which the Court (over vociferous protests from some disabled-rights advocates) unanimously ruled that an employer was not obliged to hire a disabled applicant who was at greater risk of injury and death than other workers, see Mar. 1-3, 2002 and links from there.
“Wetzel Law Firm: Retract ‘Weasel’ or Else”
“Threatened with a potential defamation suit, two individuals have apparently retracted their claimed characterization of a Spokane, Wash.-area law firm formerly known as ‘Wetzel & Wetzel’ as ‘Weasel & Weasel.'” Jim MacDonald, president of the Bayview, Idaho Chamber of Commerce, “read a letter of contrition” at the chamber’s regular monthly meeting “as demanded” by the offended lawyers. Does this mean we’re going to get in trouble with our earlier references to Cruel & Boring, We’ll Getcha & Mangle Ya, Huge Cupboards of Greed, etc.? (Martha Neil, ABA Journal, Oct. 25; Herb Huseland, “Bayview News: Law firm claims slander”, Spokane Statesman-Review, Oct. 25).
P.S. Australian lawyer Stumbling Tumblr adds, “there’s no indication in the story whether weasels had also threatened proceedings”.
Don’t
Another bunch of things not to do if you’re a member of the legal profession, all courtesy Law.com:
- Don’t forge a judge’s name to a judicial order to lull your clients into thinking you’re properly pursuing their case [Laurence S. Jurman of Dix Hills, N.Y., who’s pleaded not guilty to the above allegations; NYLJ]
- Don’t fail to inform your client in a criminal-defense trial that you yourself are facing criminal charges on charges of stalking in the same court [Steven Olitsky of Irvington, N.J., whose convicted client is arguing ineffectiveness of counsel on the grounds that the eventually-disbarred Olitsky was in no position to negotiate effectively with prosecutors; NJLJ]
- Don’t read golf magazines during depositions or leave your client alone and unrepresented by walking out of an important deposition [Jonathan D. Herbst of Philadelphia’s Margolis Edelstein; client’s loss of $11 million defamation case led to professional liability award recently reinstated by Pa. high court; Legal Intelligencer]
Abusive cop’s stress at being fired results in disability
Milwaukee cop Robert Henry was fired after being caught on tape in 2002 roughing up an arrested suspect. A federal judge has now ruled against Henry’s lawsuit over his firing. However, that doesn’t mean taxpayers are off the hook for the wayward officer’s continued support: “Henry was not criminally charged, and he later successfully filed for lifelong disability payments after he said he suffered stress for being fired. He remains on disability leave from MPD.” (John Diedrich, “Proof & Hearsay” (Journal-Sentinel blog), Nov. 1).
Wise law blog, Toronto
Attorney Garry J. Wise has some extremely kind things to say about us at his blog (Nov. 2). Thanks!
No naming the blackmailed royal — even on US websites?
Legally hazardous for a US-based website to make itself available for British readers to visit? “[Attorney Giovanni] Di Stefano claims that he has consulted several QCs and has been told that British authorities could have powers to act against foreign-based broadcasters and websites and issue a European arrest warrant. They could be liable for breaching an English court order guaranteeing anonymity to the blackmail victim and witnesses if their speculation reached Britain.” (Adam Fresco and Dominic Kennedy, “Charge anyone naming Royal ‘victim’, says accused’s lawyer”, Times Online, Oct. 31).