Updating our Apr. 28 item on Rogers v. Merck: the Washington Legal Foundation has filed a judicial misconduct complaint (Jun. 21, PDF) against Alabama Circuit Judge John Rochester, saying he should have disqualified himself from hearing the suit brought by the firm of Beasley Allen, which according to an April AP report had last October donated $60,000 to his unsuccessful campaign for a seat on the state’s high court. Judge Rochester characterized the complaint as meritless, saying “attorneys for Vioxx’s manufacturer, Merck & Co., had not complained about the donations and had not asked him to step aside from the case.” (“Complaint Filed Against Vioxx Case Judge”, AP/Forbes.com, Jun. 21).
Author Archive
“Erototoxins” as next tobacco
Judith Reisman, a peripheral yet oddly influential figure in social-conservative circles who is perhaps best known for her attacks on the late sex researcher Dr. Alfred Kinsey, has taken up a new cause: proving that exposure to pornography causes the release of injurious “erototoxins” in the human brain. Reports Britain’s Guardian:
Under the auspices of Utah’s Lighted Candle Society (LCS), Reisman and Victor Cline, a clinical psychologist at the University of Utah, began raising money from American conservative and religious organisations. They hope to raise at least $3m to conduct MRI scans on victims under the influence of porn and so prove their theories correct. They foresee two possible outcomes: if they can demonstrate that porn physically “damages” the brain, that might open the floodgates for “big tobacco”-style lawsuits against porn publishers and distributors; second, and more insidiously, if porn can be shown to “subvert cognition” and affect the parts of the brain involved in reasoning and speech, then “these toxic media should be legally outlawed, as is all other toxic waste, and eliminated from our societal structure”.
(Mark Pilkington, “Sex on the brain”, Jul. 14). Rogier Van Bakel (Nobody’s Business) has much more on Reisman (Jul. 21). (& welcome Andrew Sullivan, Instapundit readers).
Behind a pageant, busy lawyers
Representatives of the Hollywood, Fla.-based law firm of Schwartz Zweben & Associates have played a substantial role behind the scenes in helping organize, promote and support the Ms. Wheelchair America pageant and some of its state affiliates. And lawyers with the firm have filed more than 200 lawsuits in at least seven states and the District of Columbia on behalf of at least 13 pageant participants, “including state and national titleholders, state coordinators and pageant judges”. Among them: more than two dozen filed in Wisconsin’s Fox Valley since December on behalf of local coordinator Gina Hackel. In March, Janeal Lee of Appleton was stripped by pageant authorities of her title as Ms. Wheelchair Wisconsin; she believes it is because she was critical of the pageant’s role in lawsuit-promotion, although pageant coordinators deny that and say she broke a rule against being photographed out of her wheelchair.
Schwartz Zweben “also conducts seminars instructing contestants on pursuing their legal rights under the disabilities act. Lee remembered a lawyer flying in to give the Wisconsin contestants such a talk at the January pageant in Green Bay.” “The people that are the lawyers, I really like them. We got along,” said Lisa Wartchow, Lee’s 2003 predecessor as Ms. Wheelchair Wisconsin. “But I got the feeling they were there specifically to see if any of us … could bring them to our town and find cases for them.”
To verify Hackel’s claims of ADA violations in the Fox Valley, the law firm retained Ms. Wheelchair Florida 2002 Colleen Macort as a consultant, and she visited the businesses last fall, Zweben said.
Macort, who was named as a plaintiff in 63 ADA accessibility lawsuits filed in Florida by the firm over the past three years, also helped prepare the Wisconsin pageant won by Lee.
The Appleton paper (which is kind enough to quote me as part of its coverage) promises a four-part investigation, of which this is Part 1. (Ed Lowe and J.E. Espino, “Pageant, law firm closely linked”, Appleton Post-Crescent, Jul. 17). For more on mass filings of suits under the Americans with Disabilities Act and parallel state and local statutes, see Mar. 18, May 31 and many other entries on our disabled-rights page.
Supreme Court coverage
Lots of it, from me, Ted, and others, over at Point of Law, including a special page collecting posts relating to the nomination process and the Court.
More broadcast appearances
I was a guest on WABC radio’s John Gambling show this morning, discussing the Roberts nomination. At 3:30 Central I’ll be talking on the Carl Wigglesworth show in San Antonio. And circa 5:30 Eastern this afternoon I’ll make another appearance on WCBS-TV in New York.
(cross-posted at Point of Law)
Might sue Toyota over kids’ trunk suffocation
Attorney Peter M. Villari represents the family of one of the three Camden, N.J. youths who suffocated last month in the trunk of a car. Not surprisingly, Villari says he’s considering filing suit over the incident against the city of Camden, whose police department has been widely criticized for not thinking to check the trunk of the beat-up 1992 Camry after the boys went missing although it was parked steps from where they’d last been seen. Anyone else to sue? Yes, “possibly Toyota”. (“Boys Who Died Lived 17 Hours in Car Trunk, Lawyer Says”, New York Times, Jul. 19).
Teflon class action
Two Florida law firms are hoping to extract $5 billion from chemicals giant duPont by alleging that it did not inform consumers of dangers of its nonstick coating Teflon. Although there does not seem to be the smallest evidence that any user of kitchen utensils has ever been harmed by the chemicals used to make the coating, attorney Alan Kluger plans to rely on a misrepresentation theory: “I don’t have to prove that it causes cancer,” he said. Another problem with the suit, say the people at duPont, is that although the chemical perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and its salts are used in manufacturing Teflon, they are not found in the finished product. Kluger, by contrast, asserts that Teflon “contains” PFOA. (John Heilprin, “DuPont sued over Teflon”, AP/USA Today, Jul. 19; Elizabeth M. Whelan (American Council on Science and Health, “The New Litigation Against Teflon Won’t Stick”, ACSH Health Facts and Fears, Jul. 19). More: and here’s Michael Fumento (“Teflon accusation doesn’t stick”, TownHall.com, Jul. 21).
On the air
I was interviewed this afternoon for New York’s WCBS Channel 2 evening news on the Supreme Court vacancy, then joined host Chris Core of Washington, D.C.’s WMAL this evening for a discussion after it had become clear that the President’s Supreme Court pick would be Judge John Roberts. Tomorrow, I’ll be on KPCC, public radio in Southern California.
Speechless in Seattle
You can expect the press to close ranks around its own when freedom of speech is threatened, right? Well, maybe not, when the speakers in question are Fox radio hosts and the heavy hand of government is acting under the aegis of campaign regulation. (Ryan Sager, “Seattle, Post Intelligence”, TechCentralStation, Jul. 19). Sager’s blog has further details, here and here. For more on the controversy over a judge’s order that comments by KVI hosts John Carlson and Kirby Wilbur be counted as campaign contributions, see Jul. 11.
Banking while intoxicated
Maggie Rizer earned millions as a successful model, but lost it in defalcations by her stepfather John Breen, who held power of attorney over her bank accounts back in her hometown of Watertown, N.Y. Now she’s suing HSBC, the bank; among her claims is that Breen’s demeanor should have constituted adequate warning that his withdrawals were improper and not in her best interest. The bank’s attorneys, in their motion for dismissal of the claim, argue (among numerous other defenses) that: “HSBC has no duty to screen its customers for use (of) alcohol or any other substance. There is no law prohibiting banking while intoxicated or while using medication. To hold that such a duty exists would place an unreasonable, and illogical duty upon banks.” (“Banking While Intoxicated: No Such Law, Says HSBC In Response To Rizer Lawsuit”, WWTI (Watertown, N.Y.), Jul. 18). In other news of intoxication, Eric Laverriere has sued the Waltham, Mass. police department, which collared him while breaking up a New Year’s Eve party at a friend’s house, then took him into “protective custody” and a nine-hour lockup. His suit contends that he had not caused any public disturbance and that drinking in private falls constitutionally short of adequate grounds for arrest. (Shelley Murphy, “Lawsuit asserts right to get drunk on private property”, Boston Globe, Jul. 8). Wave Maker (Jul. 8) has more details.