Author Archive

“It’s not spam when I send it”

“Attorney general Charlie Crist was an integral player in getting an anti-spam law passed last year in the state of Florida. Under the law, offenders are subject to fines of up to $500 for every e-mail sent. Now running for governor, someone on the Crist campaign is responsible for sending e-mails to promote the candidacy and solicit campaign donations. Recipients have reportedly attempted to unsubscribe without success.” A Crist spokeswoman says the emails don’t count as spam because they’re not deceptive. (Clickz blog, Jan. 9; Adam C. Smith, “Crist e-mail draws ire”, St. Petersburg Times, Dec. 21; “From anti-spam stand to e-mail campaign”, AP/Miami Herald, Dec. 23; Brian McWilliams, Dec. 24; Geek.com). For more on anti-spam laws and related issues, see, e.g., Jul. 25, 2005 and Dec. 3, 2003.

Nominate-a-case thread

Here’s another experiment: use the comments section to suggest a legal case or news story you think belongs on this site. A few ground rules:

* Only stories with live links, please. No stories that have happened to you or a friend personally, no matter how compelling, unless you can point to someone’s already-published writing or reportage on it.

* It doesn’t have to be something that just happened, but if it’s not new, do check our archives to see whether we’ve already covered it. Here’s a stored Google search to start you off.

* As usual, comments are held for review, along the lines of a letters to the editor section.

Litigious French parents: “a problematic American reflex”

Crossing the Atlantic dept.: “In what educationalists have derided as ‘a problematic American reflex’, parents are jumping to the defence of misbehaving or underperforming pupils by calling in lawyers,” reports London’s Daily Telegraph. “Teachers who summon pupils for a disciplinary hearing over even minor incidents often find themselves facing not only the youngster and his mother and father, but also a fully-robed advocate. …French teachers are taking out insurance against legal charges.” (Kim Willsher, “Pupils turn to the law over bad reports”, Jan. 22).

Borgata Babes Say Goodbye

Renee Gaud and Trisha Hart were hired as “Borgata Babes” by the Atlantic City casino of that name, made to sign an agreement requiring them to maintain hourglass figures and weight proportionate to their height, and were outfitted in “cleavage-baring bustiers, high heels and tight-fitting bolero-style jackets”. Then they discovered that managers were serious about the weight requirement and kept “emphasizing looks over job performance”. What could be more shocking or unexpected? So of course they’re suing (John Curran, “Waitresses sue casino over weight policy, allege discrimination”, AP/Newsday, Jan. 31; Dan Gross, “Ex-servers sue Borgata”, Philadelphia Daily News, Jan. 31).

Don’t know much about property

Authorities have finally cracked the largest burglary ever reported from a Massachusetts residence, the 1978 theft of a Cezanne and six other paintings from the Stockbridge home of collector Michael Bakwin. And who’d been holding on to the paintings all these years? Retired criminal defense attorney Robert M. Mardirosian, 71, who came into their possession soon after their theft when the burglar — whom Mardirosian was representing in an unrelated matter — left them at the lawyer’s residence. (The burglar had intended to fence the paintings right away, but Mardirosian had advised him he might get caught doing that.) Not long thereafter the burglar was slain by criminal associates. Mardirosian created dummy corporations and accounts to hold the paintings and at least twice tried to sell them, but was blocked when the Art Loss Register, which intervenes to prevent the sale of stolen art, took steps to stop that from happening. Mardirosian, who now lives in a gated community in Falmouth on Cape Cod, says he acted from legitimate motives: “My whole intent was to find a way to get them back to the owner in return for a 10 percent commission.” (Stephen Kurkjian, “1978 art heist solved”, Boston Globe, Feb. 1). Plus: updates February 2011 (on attorney’s conviction and return of paintings to owner).

Phila. judge: no right to anonymous online disparagement

Watch what you say about lawyers (and everyone else), cont’d: a “Philadelphia judge has ruled that a valid defamation claim trumps any right to speak anonymously on the Internet….Common Pleas Judge Albert W. Sheppard Jr. ordered the operator of two now-defunct Web sites to turn over the identities of the anonymous authors of comments on the sites that allegedly defamed a Philadelphia law firm….In the suit, the Klehr Harrison firm complains that its reputation was severely disparaged by comments on the two sites that falsely accused its lawyers of being ‘thieves,’ committing ‘fraud’ and ‘lying’ to a judge.” Although courts in some other states have protected anonymous online commenters from demands that their identity be disclosed, Sheppard said Pennsylvania law was not obliged to follow that path. (Shannon P. Duffy, “Law Firm’s Defamation Claim Found to Trump Critics’ Internet Anonymity”, The Legal Intelligencer, Jan. 23). For more on the legal hazards of criticizing Pennsylvania lawyers and judges, see Nov. 30, 2003, Mar. 16, 2004, and Oct. 24-25, 2001.

Comments are open (be very careful, please).

Jury selection, while you wait

The Lay-Skilling Enron criminal trial will be one of the highest-profile Houston trials in many years, but in the courtroom of U.S. District Judge Sim Lake the process of jury selection was over within a day. That should be a lesson to judges elsewhere — especially in state-court proceedings — who allow lawyers to turn voir dire into a manipulative process that can last weeks or even months. Tom Kirkendall and Norm Pattis comment.

P.S. The Wall Street Journal’s news side covers the issue today: Paul Davies and John Emshwiller, “Split Verdict on Selecting Juries Quickly”, Feb. 1 (sub only). Washington U. (St. Louis) law dean Kent Syverud says, “I think Enron ought to be a wake-up call to show everyone that it can be done”. Among those complaining of a too-short process is Christopher Seeger, the attorney for the plaintiff in the New Jersey Vioxx case recently won by Merck, who “said the case was lost in the jury selection. ‘If I had an opportunity to flesh out some of the biases I believe I would’ve been able to talk some of those people off the jury'”. P.P.S. The New Yorker has more about the jury questionnaires and consultants (Mimi Swartz, “Talk of the Town: Enron Multiple Choice”, Jan. 30).