As we periodically do, we’ve rotated the listing of “Greatest Hits” past posts in the right-hand column. New this time: Slower Disney teacups, Honey, you’ve got mail, Class action collusion, Bad luck with yachts, U.S. News regrets, Pie menace averted, Forgot to mention it, and Drunk: cops shoulda stopped me. A listing of all favorite posts nominated so far is here. Feel free to nominate favorites of your own, too, in comments.
Author Archive
$1.6 million for loss of dog? Not so fast
Just as a media boomlet was getting started, a Clackamas County judge has ruled that Oregon law does not permit Mark Greenup and his family to seek loss-of-companionship damages over their neighbor’s having run over their mixed cocker spaniel-Labrador retriever, Grizz, an injury for which they were asking a cool $1.625 million. The case had been touted as a potential breakthrough in the campaign to authorize essentially unlimited monetary damages over the human unhappiness caused when a pet is killed or injured (see May 10, 2005, etc.) and advocates thought they had an unusually sympathetic fact pattern to work with: the Greenups’ neighbor, Raymond Weaver, had been convicted of first-degree animal abuse. Once the principle of damages for loss of companionship had been established, of course, it would be likely to spread to contexts where simple negligence was alleged on the part of veterinarians, drivers or animal handlers. Circuit Judge Eve Miller permitted the Greenups to seek punitive damages and intentional infliction of emotional stress against Weaver (who continues to deny that he harmed the dog intentionally) but said loss-of-companionship damages are barred by Oregon law. (“Judge rejects part of dog lawsuit claim”, AP/Roseburg (Ore.) News-Review, May 23; Steve Mayes, “Case Could Redefine Value of a Pet”, Newhouse/The Oregonian, May 23; “US neighbours in dead dog lawsuit “, BBC, May 23; letters to the editor, The Oregonian, May 24).
P.S. While we’re at it, what a very bad idea: federal mandates for pet evacuation plans.
Farewell, MedPundit
The pseudonymous “Sydney Smith”, who practices medicine in the Midwest, is discontinuing her medical weblog, which was among the earliest and best of its kind. “Sydney” joined us on this site as a guestblogger in late July and early August, 2004. Update: happily, she’s back.
“£2.8m award for prisoner who tried to kill himself”
More woes in British crime and punishment: “Compensation payments to prisoners have doubled in the last year to more than £4 million, while the total legal bill to the Prison Service has reached £20 million a year, The Times has learnt.” (Richard Ford, The Times (London), May 19). A couple of recent prisoner-suicide suits in the U.S.: Apr. 17, Apr. 28.
“Golfer not liable for errant golf ball”
Assumption of risk wins one in Hawaii: “A golfer may not be held liable for mistakenly hitting another golfer with an errant golf ball, the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled.” Ryan Yoneda sued after being hit in the left eye by Andrew Tom’s wayward ball at Mililani Golf Course, but “Chief Justice Ronald Moon wrote Yoneda assumed the risk of the injury when he played golf.” However, the court did allow a lawsuit to proceed against the course owner on grounds of negligent design. (AP/San Francisco Chronicle, May 16; Ken Kobayashi, “Golf at your own risk, court rules”, Honolulu Advertiser, May 15).
NYT snoozes through Milberg scandal
I’ve got details at Point of Law, where there is also much additional Milberg coverage.
On the other hand, the Times today continues to show admirable persistence in tracking the Anthony Pellicano scandal, even though that one (unlike Milberg’s) doesn’t have its roots in New York. (David M. Halbfinger and Allison Hope Weiner, “Pellicano Case Casts Harsh Light on Hollywood Entertainment Lawyers”, May 23).
Also at Point of Law this week, in the “Featured Discussion” section, Jonathan B. Wilson and Larry Ribstein debate whether licensing lawyers makes sense.
Baseball club to hold “Frivolous Lawsuit Night”
From a May 17 news release by the Eastern League Altoona Curve:
ALTOONA- Inspired by a Los Angeles Angels fan who filed a lawsuit against the club because he did not receive a red nylon tote bag as part of the major league club’s Mother’s Day promotion last May [see May 11], the Altoona Curve have announced that they will be holding Salute to Frivolous Lawsuit Night as part of their Sunday, July 2nd game at Blair County Ballpark.
The Curve’s salute to all ridiculous lawsuits ever filed will include the following:
* A Pink Tote Bag Giveaway to the first 137 men in attendance ages 18 and over
* The first 137 women 18 and over will receive lukewarm coffee so they will not burn themselves [see Oct. 20, 2005]
* The first 137 kids will be given a beach ball with a warning not to ingest it
* Angels merchandise and novelty items given away throughout the game
* Honoring some of history’s “Most Frivolous Lawsuits” during the game
A grand prize drawing in which one fan will receive a “clue” and their own frivolous lawsuit.
Welcome visitors
My observations on the Milberg indictment drew comments from, among others, Tom Kirkendall, Steve Bainbridge, Jonathan Adler, James DeLong, and Larry Ribstein.
Stuart Taylor, Jr. on Duke rape case
“Inside Milberg’s Credenza”
I’ve got a lengthy op-ed in today’s Wall Street Journal (sub-only) discussing the indictment of Milberg Weiss. A few excerpts:
Since such payoffs are baldly illegal, prosecutors claim the firm took elaborate steps to keep them concealed from judges and others. They say Milberg funneled much of the money through law-firm cut-outs and other channels, including casinos, and drew on a stash of money kept in a safe located in a credenza in partner David Bershad’s New York office, “to which access was strictly limited.” Again and again, prosecutors add, the firm submitted sworn statements on behalf of its clients denying any receipt of the sorts of payments they were in fact receiving. …
With other class members absent, named plaintiffs are one of the few watchdogs against self-dealing or misconduct by the lawyers — specifically, the pursuit of settlements that result in high legal fees, whether or not they serve the interest of the class. … if the Justice Department’s allegations are correct, Milberg was taking no chances on the watchdogs staying pacified: It threw regular chunks of raw liver into their cages. …
The two celebrity lawyers who made Milberg famous, Melvyn Weiss and the now-departed William Lerach, have thus far escaped indictment: Of course, if they were prosecuting such a case, they would miss no opportunity to insinuate that misconduct by part of a team of top executives must have been at least tolerated by the others, that the rot goes straight to the top, that senior partners turned a convenient blind eye to signs of misconduct because they profited handsomely from that misconduct, and so forth. Messrs. Weiss and Lerach must count themselves lucky that such reasoning did not lead to their inclusion as defendants.
The Journal also has an editorial today on the subject.
Our earlier coverage: May 20 and links from there, May 21, as well as many posts at Point of Law. When The Economist profiled Melvyn Weiss three years ago, I told them, “A distinguishing characteristic of the Milberg Weiss approach is that the clients became tokens to be moved around a game board” (Jan. 17, 2002).