“For no apparent reason, the state of California, Environmental Defense, and the Natural Resources Defense Council have dragged [MIT’s Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology Richard] Lindzen and about 15 other global- warming skeptics into a lawsuit over auto- emissions standards. California et al. have asked the auto companies to cough up any and all communications they have had with Lindzen and his colleagues, whose research has been cited in court documents.” (Alex Beam, “MIT’s inconvenient scientist”, Boston Globe, Aug. 30).
Author Archive
Second Circuit nixes teacher-competence test
In a case entitled Gulino v. New York State Education Department, the federal appeals court earlier this month “reinstated a race discrimination suit against the New York State Education Department based on the theory that a test of ‘basic college-level content’ that asks applicants to get just two-thirds of the questions right is racially discriminatory because it has a ‘disparate impact’ on African-American and Latino teachers.” Dan McLaughlin at Baseball Crank acknowledges that the court relied on existing Supreme Court precedent, but is still rubbed the wrong way by its assumptions (Aug. 31).
From the comments: a chill on safety discussions
While the comments action has been lively elsewhere on this site, I noticed a comment that Jim Collins made on Ted’s post “Damned if you do, damned if you don’t files: Putnam Hospital” which I thought deserved its own freestanding entry:
The medical profession isn’t the only place where this happens. I used to be an aircraft mechanic for one of the major airlines, several years ago. Twice a month, after finishing our shift, we would go to a breakfast meeting. This meeting was attended by all of the mechanics from all of the airlines at that airport who worked the same shift. Several people from the airport and the FAA also attended. The purpose of this meeting was to share information on maintenance and airport safety issues. The FAA rep always took notes, compiled them from all of the shifts and a couple days later a copy was in your mailbox. I know of several problems and possible accidents that were prevented because of the information shared at these meetings. These meetings were suddenly stopped after company management found out that trial lawyers could obtain the minutes of them, from the FAA, through the Freedom of Information Act and use them against the airline in court.
New Times column — Katrina verdict
My new column at the Times (U.K.) Online is on last week’s Mississippi Katrina insurance verdict. (Walter Olson, “Insurers can breathe easier over Katrina lawsuits”, Aug. 30). Concluding paragraph:
Major coverage issues remain to be resolved (and appealed), but at least we can take note at this point that America is not Zimbabwe or Bolivia. As Dickie Scruggs said before the Leonard ruling, “If you win it, it’s a huge win. If you lose it, you spin it the best way you can.”
Also, I was a guest last evening (6:30 p.m. Eastern) on Marc Bernier’s high-rated radio show, “The Talk of Florida” to discuss the article.
Duke rape claim: the Times’s sorry showing
Stuart Taylor Jr. arraigns the New York Times for the many weaknesses of the recent article by Duff Wilson and Jonathan Glater which sought to rehabilitate the prosecution’s crumbling case. “The Times still seems bent on advancing its race-sex-class ideological agenda, even at the cost of ruining the lives of three young men who it has reason to know are very probably innocent.” (Slate, “Witness for the Prosecution?”, Aug. 29). Earlier: Aug. 25, Jun. 24, etc.
“What should be taught in Torts?”
The new symposium on legal education at Bill Childs’ website is well worth a look-through, even aside from Ted’s contribution.
“Trial lawyers target Republicans”
The topics of ATLA’s ad campaign in five GOP districts — drug prices and oil prices — don’t exactly seem central to the organized plaintiff’s bar’s own mission in life, but perhaps the wider message is just that the national Republican party Must Be Punished for supporting liability reform, and any issues that come to hand will do. (Jim Kuhnhenn, AP/Washington Post, Aug. 29)
Busy Lizzies in a hanging pot
Think twice about trying to grow your own from nursery stock: If the patent held by biotech firm Syngenta doesn’t get you, the indigenous-flora royalty supposedly owed to the government of Tanzania just might (Antony Barnett, “The new piracy: how West ‘steals’ Africa’s plants”, The Observer (UK), Aug. 27).
ATLA, AAJ and the inky cuttlefish
The editors of the Los Angeles Times are not impressed by the decision of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America to change its name to the American Association for Justice (AAJ), and quote Orwell: “The great enemy of clear language is insincerity,” he wrote. “When there is a gap between one’s real and one’s declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink.” (“A Trial Lawyer by Any Other Name” (editorial), Aug. 11) (via Wallace). See Jul. 28 (“kitten fish”), etc.
ADA filing mills: get those facts straight!
Taking advantage of the liberal (and lucrative) provisions of disabled-rights law in the Golden State, wheelchair user Jerry Doran has filed “more than 200 lawsuits in state and federal court against restaurants and other public establishments throughout California, alleging insufficient disability access. He has filed so many suits, in fact, that he has begun to lose track,” notes George Wallace at Declarations and Exclusions. Last month U.S. District Court Judge Cormac J. Carney returned judgment in favor of a Del Taco restaurant in Mission Viejo — 500 miles from where Doran lives — against Doran’s claim of having suffered improper lack of accommodation. Wallace (Jul. 18) takes up the tale:
Although there was no question that Mr. Doran is disabled, Judge Carney was ultimately unable to persuade himself that there was evidence sufficient to prove that Doran had actually sustained any harm at, or had ever actually been to, the Mission Viejo Del Taco.
After describing and praising the purposes of the ADA, Judge Carney’s Memorandum Decision [PDF] notes that it is a tool prone to misuse:
Despite the important mission of the ADA, there are those individuals who would abuse its private cause of action provision by filing lawsuits solely with the intent to profit financially. This potential for abuse of the ADA has been well documented in the Central District of California . . . . Courts have referred to this proliferation of ADA lawsuits as a ‘cottage industry’ and have labeled plaintiffs who file these lawsuits ‘professional plaintiffs,’ ‘serial plaintiffs,’ and ‘professional pawns.’
* * *
The consequences of this abuse of the ADA are severe: businesses and insurers are harmed, the integrity of the bar is called into question, and the public’s confidence in the courts is impaired. . . . Simply put, this litigation abuse of the ADA results in the exact harmful consequences that Congress sought to eradicate by passing the ADA. As more than one court has observed, the result of this abusive litigation is that ‘the means for enforcing the ADA (attorney’s fees) have become more important and more desirable than the end (accessibility for disabled individuals).’
Most of the remainder of the opinion focuses on the discrepancies in Doran’s responses to interrogatories, his responses to questions in deposition three weeks later, and his testimony at trial, in which key details — such as how often and when he had actually visited the Mission Viejo Del Taco — slipped and slid uncontrollably. Highlights:
* Doran first went to Del Taco #415 in Spring of 2002 or in Spring of 2003, unless his first visit was in 1988.
* Prior to filing suit, he went to the location twice, or perhaps three times, or possibly just once, although he may have gone there on as many as five or six occasions.
* “Mr. Doran’s complaint refers to objects — display racks and vending machines — which do not even exist at Del Taco restaurant #415.”
* “When Mr. Doran stated that he ordered an enchilada to eat during his alleged visit, he must have been testifying about a trip to a Taco Bell restaurant since Taco Bell — and not Del Taco — serves enchiladas.”
* “When describing the barriers he encountered at Del Taco restaurant #415, Mr. Doran stated that the hand dryers in the restroom were located too high. . . . Because Del Taco restaurant #415 does not have hand dryers in its restrooms, it is clear that Mr. Doran was testifying about a visit to another restaurant, or place of public accommodation, when asked to identify the barriers he encountered.”
* “When asked if there were any fast food chains that Mr. Doran frequented that he had not sued, he replied that he had not sued Kentucky Fried Chicken. In fact, Mr. Doran has sued Kentucky Fried Chicken. When asked to try again, Mr. Doran replied that he had not sued Jack in the Box. Although apparently unbeknownst to him, Mr. Doran has sued Jack in the Box also.”
(Doran v. Del Taco, opinion in PDF format courtesy Decs & Excs; post, Jul. 18). For more on the dubious practices of ADA filing mills, see our disabled rights page.