“Judges appoint Mark Dottore to stabilize troubled companies. Critics say he’s cleaning them out.” (Kevin Hoffman, “King Nothing”, Cleveland Scene, Feb. 9). For a glimpse at the world of court-appointed trusteeships in New York, see Nov. 11, 2003.
Author Archive
Oz: party hosts not liable for barbecue misuse
At approximately 2 a.m., long after the 18-year-old host’s parents had gone to bed, some guests at a backyard party decided they would relight the barbecue. Ignoring warnings, one of them poured in an entire bottle of lighting fluid and the resulting fireball injured a second guest, who sued the family for improper party supervision and won a A$210,000 damages award. In November, however, the high court of the state of New South Wales overturned that award, holding that the parents could not reasonably have foreseen the guests’ irresponsible behavior. According to attorney Julie Cameron of Corrs Chambers Westgarth (“Thank God It’s Friday: Appeal Judges extinguish BBQ claim”, Dec. 3), the plaintiffs also “argued that consideration should be given to North American case law, where a doctrine known as Social Host Liability has been adopted, attaching liability to hosts at parties where alcohol is served.” But the court did not find the North American law persuasive, finding that in Australia:
Barbecue parties with liquor attended by young adults occur in their hundreds all over Australia every evening; the perception that the activity, supervised or unsupervised by older adults, is one involving a foreseeable risk of personal injury is, in my opinion, an entirely wrong perception.
The appellants were not in any relationship with the guests which has been or should be established by judicial authority to impose any special duty or responsibility for the safety of the guests.
In a concurring opinion, Justice Tobias said Australian community opinion would reject any open-ended extension of liability to homeowners for the general misconduct of inebriated guests, “the burden of which would inevitably result in social functions where alcohol is served becoming a thing of the past”. (Parissis and Ors. v. Bourke). See The Third Branch (blog), Nov. 30. For more items from Down Under — including numerous hopeful developments in recent years as the country has pulled back from a previous swing toward litigiousness — see our Australia page.
Judge orders entire law firm to ethics class
Things might start getting lively if judges used this sanction more often: “A federal judge in Fresno, Calif., has ordered the entire 80-lawyer firm of Lozano Smith back to school for a refresher course in ethics as a sanction for repeated misrepresentation of facts and the law in a dispute over aid for a learning-disabled student.” U.S. District Judge Oliver Wanger said the law firm, which represents many California school districts in special-ed matters, “its lead attorney in the case, Elaine Yama, and the district [the Bret Harte Union School District in central California] engaged in repeated misstatements of the record, frivolous objections to plaintiff’s statement of facts, and repeated mischaracterizations of the law.'” (Pamela A. MacLean, “Judge Orders Law Firm Back to School”, National Law Journal, Feb. 14).
Daily evangelical TV show
Just another part of Mr. Scrushy’s criminal defense strategy? (Simon Romero, “Will the Real Richard Scrushy Please Step Forward?”, New York Times, Feb. 17).
Eyewitness identifications
Fixing some of the problems (Steve Chapman, “You can’t always believe what you think you see”, syndicated/Chicago Tribune, Feb. 17).
Happens to judges too
From Phil Kabler’s “Statehouse Beat” column in the Charleston, W.V. Gazette, Feb. 14 (reg):
It sounds like one of those urban legends, but this one is true.
No sooner had [State] Supreme Court Justice Elliott “Spike” Maynard gotten out of his SUV after a fender-bender downtown last week when a woman approached him, asked if he was hurt, and gave him the name and phone number of the Charleston law firm where she works.
Sugar industry vs. Splenda
Alarmed by the sweetener Splenda’s steady rise in consumer popularity and market share, organized sugar producers in December filed a California false-advertising suit against distributor McNeil Nutritionals, a unit of Johnson & Johnson. The lawsuit challenges the artificial sweetener’s slogan “made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar”, on the grounds that sucralose, the active ingredient in Splenda, is produced using chemical processes, even if sugar does happen to go into it. A number of private lawyers are pursuing similar theories in consumer lawsuits pursuing class-action status. In turn, J&J has struck back with a lawsuit against the Sugar Association and other defendants alleging a “malicious smear campaign” aimed at undercutting consumer confidence in the sweetener’s safety. (Patrick Walters, “Splenda’s maker sues sugar producers”, AP/Detroit Free Press, Feb. 9; Laura Petrecca and Holly M. Sanders, “Sweet and Low”, New York Post, Feb. 13; Claire Cummings, “Splenda sugar substitute receives praise, lawsuits from consumers”, State News (Michigan State U.), Feb. 16). Update: National Law Journal coverage of controversy (Apr. 8).
Pittsburgh RR crossing case
Welcome Baltimore Sun readers
On Thursday the Baltimore Sun quoted me saying unflattering things about Stephen L. Snyder, the successful local attorney who’s taken out very costly ads ostensibly aimed at attracting a $1 billion case (see Feb. 16). I said Snyder has probably has made it onto the Top Ten list of tasteless lawyer-advertisers, having particularly in mind the cheesy way his website flips off would-be clients whose cases, however meritorious, lack a big enough payoff (Jennifer McMenamin, “In search of a $1 billion case, fielding 100 calls”, Baltimore Sun, Feb. 16)(reg). A week earlier the same paper quoted me commenting on the likely impact on civil litigation of a federal grand jury’s indictment of the W.R. Grace Co. and seven of its current or former executives; the charges arise from the widely publicized exposure of townspeople and others to asbestos hazards from the company’s vermiculite mine at Libby, Montana. (William Patalon III, “Grace’s plight made worse”, Feb. 9).
And: Rob Asghar of the Ashland (Ore.) Daily Tidings devoted two recent columns to the problem of overlawyering and was kind enough to quote my opinions (“Law and disorder”, part 1 (Feb. 7) and part 2 (Feb. 14)). NYC councilman David Yassky, sponsor of the let’s-sue-over-guns ordinance that I criticized in the New York Times two weeks ago (see Feb. 6), responds today with a letter to the editor defending the legislation (Feb. 20). My Manhattan Institute colleague Jim Copland, writing in the Washington Times on the passage of the Class Action Fairness Act, quotes my Feb. 11 post on the subject (“Tort tax cut”, Feb. 15). Finally, the New York Sun covers a recent Institute luncheon at which I introduced ABC’s John Stossel (Robert E. Sullivan, “John Stossel Chides the ‘Liberal’ Press for Spinelessness”, Feb. 9)(sub-$).
Put the blame on games, cont’d
Devin Thompson, 16 at the time, is charged with murdering two Fayette, Ala. policemen and an emergency dispatcher in June 2003. Now members of the victims’ families are suing the maker of the Grand Theft Auto video game, retailers Wal-Mart and Gamestop, and Sony, which manufactures the PlayStation, as well as Thompson himself, on the grounds that the violent game “trained” the teen to commit the real-life killings. Representing the families, if you haven’t already guessed, is attorney Jack Thompson, whose anti-videogame crusade has for years provided material for these columns (Sept. 26 and Dec. 17, 2003, etc.)(Johnny Kampis, “Lawsuit claims video violence precipitated Fayette police shootings”, Tuscaloosa News, Feb. 15; Tony Smith, “Grand Theft Auto firm faces ‘murder training’ lawsuit”, The Register (UK), Feb. 17). More: “The supporters [of anti-videogame government action] think violent games produce violent teens, but the evidence is lacking.” (Steve Chapman, “Violent video games and Illinois’ loopy legislators”, syndicated/Chicago Tribune, Mar. 20)