Attorney General Christine Gregoire of Washington, a leading figure in brokering the 1998 tobacco settlement that ensured cartel-based profits for big tobacco companies and gigantic fees for the lawyers who sued them, is now in a close race for governor of the state. Very helpfully, she’s getting political contributions (via the Democratic Governors Association) from plaintiff’s-side lawyers such as Richard Scruggs, Joseph Rice and Steve Berman who were made exceedingly rich by the settlement, and who’ve given more than $1 million to the DGA in the space of a month. And another grateful contributor to the DGA is the lawyer who represented … Philip Morris. Isn’t it great when people can get along? (Ralph Thomas and Andrew Garber, “Out-of-state donors feed Gregoire fund”, Seattle Times, Oct. 28). For more, see Oct. 11, 2004, and Jul. 17 and Sept. 13-14, 2000.
Author Archive
“Attorneys who fought ADM get $132 million”
Coca-Cola, Pepsico and other buyers of high-fructose corn syrup got $531 million in the largest in a series of settlements arising from charges of price-fixing against Archer Daniels Midland, the agribusiness giant, and its competitors. So by the logic of bounty-hunting, it was only fair for plaintiff’s counsel to pocket a quarter of the sum. (Andy Kravetz, Peoria Journal-Star, Oct. 15; “Archer Daniels Midland to Pay $400M”, AP/Forbes, Jun. 17; account of case at class action firm of Kaplan Fox, Jul. 19).
“Ford wins cop-car suit”
In Belleville, Ill., a St. Clair County jury has ruled that the Ford Motor Co.’s Crown Victoria police cruiser is not defective and not unreasonably susceptible to fuel-fed fires after high-speed rear-end collisions. A class action on behalf of Illinois police departments had been filed in the famously pro-plaintiff county. The verdict represents a rebuke to trial lawyers who’ve been campaigning nationally for some time against the vehicle: see Nov. 5, 2003 and Sept. 29, 2004. (Bloomberg/Detroit Free Press, Oct. 16; Beth Hundsdorfer, “Ford earns victory in police car suit”, Belleville News-Democrat, Oct. 16).
Welcome visitors
My commentary yesterday on the presidential contest seemed to strike a nerve; at least it got picked up at a large number of sites, including Andrew Sullivan (calling this blog “estimable”), Tom Palmer (that word again!), Reason “Hit and Run”, Andrew Tobias, PrestoPundit, and many others. The number of visitors more than doubled from an ordinary day, to 14,353, which may or may not be a record. Tom Veal at Stromata wrote a lengthy response from a pro-Bush point of view, and there was a lot of email too, including several from valued friends who take issue with my position. It’ll be a while before I can read or respond to all the mail, but that’s true even in less busy times than this.
Michigan malpractice
Striking numbers: “Despite statewide reforms designed to lower the cost of medical malpractice insurance, the most expensive annual premium for a general surgeon in Wayne County [Detroit] reached $194,000 for $1 million of coverage — a 60 percent increase over last year, according to a survey released last week by Medical Liability Monitor, a trade journal. A doctor in Grand Rapids would pay $63,000 for the same coverage.” Both are doing better than general surgeons in Dade County, Fla., where the comparable figure is $277,000. (Sheri Hall, “Malpractice rates drive off doctors”, Detroit News, Oct. 25). More: MichMedMal blog, Oct. 25.
Window box menace averted
Wary of personal injury claims, a British insurer has sought to impose a ban on the window boxes and flower pots by which inner-city residents have long sought to cheer up their high-rise flats. According to the Norwich Union company, outdoor plants above ground level at the Bow Quarter habitations in East London are an “avoidable event” and must be removed unless firmly fastened down, which it may not be possible to do in a manner consistent with historic-preservation regulations. “Rather than dropping on heads with their cargo of busy lizzies or geraniums, the main threat they pose to life and limb seemed to be people standing on them for support, or banging their heads on the boxes from beneath [per a spokesman for a safety group].” (James Moore and Roger Highfield, “Insurance firm bans window box ‘peril'”, Daily Telegraph, Oct. 26).
Election roundup: the White House
Speaking only for myself and not for Ted (and obviously not for anyone else either), I’m among those who believes George W. Bush doesn’t merit re-election, though I supported and in fact actively advised his campaign the first time around. For some of the reasons, check the links in this Oct. 5 post. Foreign policy and defense blunders aside, the last thing I wanted was an administration combining aggressive social conservatism with uncontrolled spending and big new government programs.
Some Bush strategists have seemed confident that secular-minded supporters of small government and individual liberty — a rather important constituency, historically, within the Republican Party — would have nowhere to go this fall, since it’s not as if the record of Sen. John Kerry inspires confidence. But there are places to go, if not especially attractive ones. Prof. Richard Epstein of the University of Chicago School of Law, whose scholarship has inspired so many of us, says he plans to vote for the Libertarian nominee (true, as Megan McArdle points out, the nominee in question appears to be a barking moonbat, but the point of a Libertarian vote is to send a well understood protest message that stands apart from personalities). My favorite syndicated columnist, Steve Chapman of the Chicago Tribune, is actually planning to cast a Democratic presidential ballot for apparently the first time in his life (“Why I’m voting for John Kerry”, Oct. 24). Chapman quotes Cato’s Dave Boaz making perhaps the strongest argument that can be made for the Democrat on domestic policy: “Republicans wouldn’t give Kerry every bad thing he wants, and they do give Bush every bad thing he wants.” The Detroit News, meanwhile, editorializes in favor of none of the above. Finally, for balance, here’s a link to Coyote Blog, run by a small businessman who says he’s going to support Bush as a “single-issue voter” motivated by the subject matter of this website, that is to say, the need to reform the litigation system.
Election roundup: down the ticket…
Won’t we all be glad when it’s over:
* At Point of Law, I’ve got a post up tracking the current status of the propositions on four states’ ballots that would limit medical malpractice litigation or fees. The situation in Florida looks grim for doctors who’ve pushed such curbs (they’ve been outspent by their lawyer opponents, $22 million to $7 million). Voters in Nevada, Oregon and Wyoming may be better disposed toward their states’ ballot measures.
* On Friday, Ted posted about how critics of trial lawyers are getting sued for running an ad commenting on the Illinois Supreme Court race. Unfortunately, that’s just one of numerous instances in which criticizing the Litigation Lobby in paid advertisements is itself getting to be legally hazardous. In a new post at Point of Law, I list two other recent instances.
* Both the New York Times and the National Law Journal are out with stories on the very nasty and expensive battles between business interests and trial lawyers in state supreme court races, especially those in West Virginia (see May 13, etc.) and Illinois (Adam Liptak, “Judicial Races in Several States Become Partisan Battlegrounds”, Oct. 24; Emily Heller, “Judicial Races Get Meaner”, National Law Journal, Oct. 25).
* “Voters may run a gantlet of lawyers before reaching the ballot box on Nov. 2.” The two major parties are deploying lawyers by the thousand to challenge state procedures and individual votes (Miles Benson, “Voting in a Battleground State? Prepare to Meet a Lawyer at the Polls”, syndicated/Newhouse, Oct. 23).
Tasteful lawyer-ad Hall of Fame
In 2001 Brookman, a law firm in London, ran ads in the men’s bathrooms of pubs soliciting divorce business with a picture of a packed suitcase and the slogan “Ditch the bitch”. The Advertising Standards Agency later ruled against a complaint that the ad was offensive and encouraged divorce. Defenders of the law firm pointed out that it was evenhanded and also solicited women’s business with ads saying bad things about men. (“Dump the chump…”, Lawyers Weekly Australia, Aug. 19, 2004; account of controversy at ad agency site; Scott Norvell, “Tongue Tied”, FoxNews.com, May 21, 2001).
“Why are music companies suing their customers?”
Tyler Cowen has some theories (Marginal Revolution, Oct. 21).