Our free periodic newsletter went out to subscribers this afternoon. Each issue summarizes a few weeks’ worth of postings in terse yet wry style. To join the list, change your address, etc., visit this page (requires Google registration).
Author Archive
Court-picking
Law profs Richard Epstein (Chicago) and Stephen Presser (Northwestern) are exchanging views on the Supreme Court vacancy as the latest Featured Discussion on Point of Law.
Merck Vioxx trial
Ted has some more hard-hitting commentary on the latest developments today at Point of Law, adding to what he wrote here Jul. 15 (and see Jim Copland, PoL, Jul. 18 for many more links). Further coverage: Aug. 19 ($253 million jury verdict).
More boilerplate in lawyers’ emails
Whistleblower fees
They’re such a great deal for the public, you know:
An Oakland, Calif., attorney who blasted the University of California Regents for wasting taxpayer money during a seven-year lawsuit is asking for $5.4 million in fees and costs — 2 1/2 times what his client got.
Patricia Gillette of Heller Ehrman, representing the UC Regents, described attorney Gary Gwilliam’s request as “outrageous”: “Gary likes to talk about how much taxpayers’ dollars are being wasted by the lab, and then he has the audacity to ask for $5.4 million in his plaintiff’s case”. (Warren Lutz, The Recorder, Jul. 21).
“Richard Branson claims to own all uses of ‘Virgin'”
Boing Boing (Jul. 27) and Chilling Effects (Jul. 10) have details. See Amanda Cantrell, “Branson trademark suit sparks debate”, CNN/Money, Jun. 29. Update: Jan. 3, 2006.
Class action fees slashed — or not
Last month Vice Chancellor Leo E. Strine Jr. of Delaware’s Chancery Court slashed by three-quarters a $4.95 million fee request by class action lawyers who intervened on behalf of shareholders in a dispute involving Cox Enterprises, the media company; he blasted some of the lawyers’ filings as “dashed off complaints” and “hastily drafted throwaways” and questioned whether they had done much to influence the final disposition of the transaction. In Atlanta, on the other hand, “Fulton Superior Court Judge Constance C. Russell awarded all of the requested $1.25 million in fees to Atlanta lawyers Corey D. Holzer and Michael I. Fistel Jr. of Holzer & Holzer; Steven J. Estep of Cohen, Cooper, Estep & Mudder; and other lawyers” in parallel class action litigation arising from the same dispute. “A key difference between the two cases was that a group of shareholders in the Delaware case filed official objections to the fee requests, while in Atlanta, the lawyer for those shareholders informally submitted information from the Delaware case to argue that the lawyers in the Fulton case provided little, if any, benefit to the shareholders they represented.” The objecting lawyer in both the Delaware and the Georgia proceedings was Elliott J. Weiss, a professor at the University of Arizona’s James E. Rogers College of Law. Apparently feeling that Weiss’s less-than-official submission could be brushed aside, Judge Russell issued an order approving the fees without elaboration. (Steven H. Pollak, “Ga. Lawyers in Cox Case Escape Fee-Slashing Endured by Delaware Counterparts”, Fulton County Daily Report, Jul. 18). More: Francis Pileggi (Jun. 24) has posted a copy of the Delaware decision (PDF) and Larry Ribstein has commented Jul. 20 (referring to “Chancellor Strine’s classic-to-be opinion”) and again Jul. 29 (“The vice chancellor paints a picture of truly parasitic lawyers inserting themselves into a corporate transaction and demanding to be paid big bucks to go away.”)
Willy Wonka as defendant
Batman and The Incredibles aren’t the only ones who might want to worry about being taken to court over their astounding feats. (Christine Hurt, The Conglomerate, Jul. 24; scroll down for a comment from Ted).
TrackBack mostly suspended
Until early this year, TrackBack spam was not a problem for this site. Now it’s risen in volume to hundreds per day, outrunning the willingness of our hosting service, Verio, to support the resulting burdens on its servers. As part of the steps needed to resolve yesterday’s technical crisis, we’ve unfortunately had to disable TrackBack for older posts site-wide. We hope to make an exception for some new posts, but even on those it will probably stay open for no more than a few days.
It may be hoped that eventual improvements to Movable Type will admit the legitimate TrackBacks while screening out the rest, bringing us closer to that day when the drug sites cease from spamming and the hold’ems ping no more. In the mean time, Technorati (when operational) remains a reasonably current way of seeing who’s been discussing our posts, and site owners that link to our posts should consider dropping us a contemporaneous email to let us know (editor at [this-domain-name] or tedfrank at [this-domain-name]), which affords us the clearest shot at installing a manual linkback should we decide to go that route.
N.J. solons: let’s ban smoking while driving
It’s a distraction, the same as using a cell phone while driving, claim state reps John McKeon (D-Essex) and Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen), who are co-sponsoring a bill that would impose $250 fines on those caught with lighted cigarettes behind the wheels of their own cars. The bill is given scant chance of passage — this year, at least (“No butts behind wheel? N.J. moves on smokers”, AP/MSNBC, Jul. 25; “Jersey going too far with anti-smoking bill” (editorial), Camden Courier-Post, Jul. 27; Reason “Hit and Run”, Jul. 25; Outside the Beltway, Jul. 25). Blog reaction has been overwhelmingly negative. Mark at Curious Character (Jul. 27) believes “it’s bad policy to pass laws that you can’t (and won’t) be able to enforce”. Functional Ambivalent (Jul. 26) points out that a study of drivers’ distraction-related accidents shows drivers’ fumbling with climate controls and stereo systems causes many more accidents than fumbling with cigarettes, but no one is proposing to ban music in cars (yet). Jeff Goldstein (Jul. 25) sees a Kelo angle, while KipEsquire (Jul. 25) points out that smokers allowed to indulge in their habit make calmer drivers than those suffering from prolonged nicotine deprivation. For more on the ever-widening reach of smoking bans, see our tobacco page, including Jul. 12, 2005 and Jul. 29, 2004 (smoking in apartments and condos), Jun. 24, 2004 (on the beach), and May 29, 2004 (in cars when children are present).