The decay of occupational exemptions to jury service means that more doctors, nurses and other persons with considerable professional expertise are making it into jury pools and even sometimes being allowed to sit as jurors, at least assuming that lawyers decline to use challenges to exclude them. One Nassau County, N.Y. judge even recalls “presid[ing] over a business dissolution case in which the lawyers allowed an accountant to sit on the jury. ‘Why they left the accountant on I’ll never know, but the lawyers were quite satisfied,” he said. (Imagine — relevant life experience not being screened out in the course of the jury selection process!) Oregon prosecutor Joshua Marquis, an official with the National District Attorneys Association, does harbor a prejudice against one particular kind of professional called to jury service, namely lawyers themselves. “They’re terrible jurors — I should hit myself in the face with a stick if I ever let a lawyer on a jury again.” (Leonard Post, “Dealing With Jurors’ Expertise”, National Law Journal, Dec. 23).
Author Archive
Nancy Grace
The CNN legal commentator, famous for her throw-away-the-key opinions on criminal justice matters, is perhaps equally famous for her own backstory as a crime victim. But how well does her version of that story stand up to scrutiny? (Rebecca Dana, “Did Nancy Grace, TV Crimebuster, Muddy Her Myth?” New York Observer, Mar. 6). Take it away, Prof. Bainbridge…
Selling short, then suing
At Point of Law’s “Featured Discussion”, Moin Yahya and Larry Ribstein are debating whether the government can or should do anything about the practice of lawyers’ (or their clients’ or confederates’) selling short the stocks of companies they plan to sue, then cashing in on the resulting drop in the stock price. See May 5, 2005; PoL Feb. 6.
“Nominate a favorite post” thread
Recently we introduced a sidebar on the front page with a sampling of a few of the site’s “Greatest Hits” — stories and posts that made a big hit with readers, have been much linked to, or are otherwise especially memorable. (More information about the list here). If you’re a longterm reader or even if you’re not, feel free to use the comments section to nominate your own favorites that you think belong on the list. To look up older posts, use the search function for posts since mid-2003 or before that, or try a Google search.
Defensive echocardiograms
Katrina cruise-ship evacuees dig in
“A federal court hearing on whether some two dozen hurricane evacuees can remain on a cruise ship past a mid-week deadline was delayed Monday while lawyers for the evacuees and the federal government tried to work out a compromise.” (“Settlement efforts underway in lawsuit over cruise ship deadline”, AP/KATC, Feb. 27). The Scotia Prince, on loan by its owners to FEMA to house St. Bernard Parish evacuees, was supposed to set sail this week. “Evacuees’ attorney Michael Ginart Jr. said he would work to keep the evacuees on the ship as long as possible but declined to say what exactly what the settlement might entail.” (“Hurricane Evacuees Head to Court Over Cruise Ship Housing”, AP/FoxNews.com, Feb. 27; Steve Ritea, “Cruise ship residents sue over Wednesday eviction”, New Orleans Times-Picayune, Feb. 25).
Bartlett, “Impostor”
In the mail: my old friend Bruce Bartlett’s new book, “Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy“, discussed by its author here. I haven’t had a chance to do more than skim it, but here’s a truncated version of its Appendix I, reminding us of the record of Presidents in using their veto pens to stop legislation:
FDR…………635 vetoes
Truman…………250
Eisenhower…..181
Kennedy…………21
Johnson…………30
Nixon……………..43
Ford………………66
Carter…………….31
Reagan………….78
G.H.W. Bush…..44
Clinton……………38
Geo. W. Bush……0
Among the legislation enacted under the presidency of George W. Bush is the free-speech-curtailing McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill (which he’d pledged to veto), Sarbanes-Oxley, the prescription drug entitlement, and the expansion of the federal role in education, as well as innumerable profligate appropriations bills. The most recent president to veto no bills, before the current one, was James Garfield, who served for only about a half year in 1881 because of his untimely death.
Soda suits: Banzhaf browbeats school officials
More skirmishing in preparation for the expected lawsuit against soft-drink vendors over sales in Massachusetts schools (see Dec. 5, Dec. 7, Feb. 7, etc.), via a Boston Globe editorial (“Vending against obesity”, Jan. 30):
In advance of the suit, Washington lawyer John Banzhaf sent an e-mail to 50-100 school committee members in Massachusetts ”to warn of your inevitable involvement in these law suits as a named party or otherwise…”
A couple of years back, Banzhaf threatened to sue the Seattle school district for renewing a $400,000 vending-machine contract with Coca-Cola (Jul. 3, 2003). Prof. Banzhaf’s other doings, which have ensured him regular appearances on this site, include proposing lawsuits against parents of obese children and against doctors who fail to warn their obese patients about overeating (Dec. 3, 2004).
A South Park episode, deep-sixed?
From a Rolling Stone investigative report on L. Ron Hubbard’s Church of Scientology (Janet Reitman, “Inside Scientology”, Feb. 23):
The church has a storied reputation for squelching its critics through litigation, and according to some reports, intimidation (a trait that may explain why the creators of South Park jokingly attributed every credit on its November 2005 sendup of Scientology to the fictional John and Jane Smith; Paramount, reportedly under pressure, has agreed not to rerun the episode here or to air it in England).
More on Scientology and litigation: Oct. 25, 2005, Apr. 16, 2004; Mar. 25-26, 2002; Mar. 19-20, 2001; May 3, 2000.
Fashion and IP protection
It’s common for producers of fashionable clothing to rip off each other’s popular ideas, and unless an item of apparel carries a deceptive label American law will provide little legal recourse for the original innovator against the imitator. Why is American fashion design nonetheless a highly innovative field? And does a similar analysis carry over to other areas where legal protection against copycats is weak, such as furniture design, hairstyle design and the development of food recipes? Tyler Cowen wonders at Marginal Revolution (Feb. 27).