“There are no hard numbers on the march size since police stopped actually counting crowds (via overhead photos) a few years ago after they were threatened with a suit. The [L.A. Times] spoke to ‘police sources’ who guessed that there were somewhere between 500,000 and 800,000 protestors, which would make the march [supporting legal abortion] among the biggest in years.” (Eric Umansky, “Today’s Papers: Demonstrating Your Point”, Slate, Apr. 26). “After the 1995 Million Man March, organizers maintained that at least 1 million men took part. That was more than double what the U.S. Park Police estimated. The organizers threatened to sue. Ultimately, researchers from Boston University, working from photographic images, judged the crowd size at more than 800,000. … After the dispute over the size of the crowd at the Million Man March, the Park Police decided in 1997 that the department no longer would make official estimates.” (“March One Of Largest Mall Events”, Washington Post, Apr. 26).
Author Archive
The sewers and the sued
Various towns and small cities in Eastern Washington have spent small fortunes upgrading their sewage systems as required by law, and the state Department of Ecology says it’s satisfied with their progress toward compliance. But a private Seattle-based group that calls itself Waste Action Project is suing the towns anyway, holding large potential financial penalties over their heads. For example, citing the remedy provisions of the federal Clean Water Act, it’s demanding $27,500 a day in fines, going back over 16 years, against the Lincoln County town of Wilbur, population 880, which has already spent millions on improvements in an attempt to bring itself into compliance with the Act. “The law also allows Waste Action to collect attorney fees if it proves violations that were reported by the defendants. The cities are required to report violations to the Department of Ecology and the lawsuits are based on the defendants’ own admissions.” Wilbur Mayor Don Reid is less than charitable about the motives of the environmental group, which has filed at least 40 enforcement actions around the state: “The purpose of their action is to put some money in their pocket, but they’re trying to hide that,” he charged. Seattle attorney and Waste Action co-founder Richard Smith calls that accusation “ridiculous”: “I am a competent lawyer,” he said. “I can make a hell of a lot of money doing other things than this.” (John Craig, “Sewage suits rile East Side towns”, Spokane Spokesman-Review, Apr. 5)(Mar. 3 council meeting minutes, town of Wilbur)(PDF). See also Jul. 23, 2001 (first item).
“Patients Die as Doctors Fear Malpractice”
Neurosurgeons are reducing their litigation risk by refusing to see emergency patients, and the results can be fatal. (FoxNews.com, Apr. 25).
Update: Gotham’s car-leasing calamity
The New York Times weighs in on the disaster for consumers that has resulted from the state’s “vicarious liability” law. Porsche and Hyundai are the latest automakers to suspend leasing in the Empire State. “In 2002, 224,000 New Yorkers leased cars, according to the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. Last year, that number dropped to 142,656.” (Marc Santora, “Many Carmakers Stop Leasing in New York, Citing Accident Liability Law”, Apr. 24). For our earlier coverage of the issue, see Apr. 2 and links from there.
Update: trial lawyers’ war against Allstate
Plaintiff’s lawyers have for years pursued a grudge match against the Allstate insurance company because of its “Do You Need An Attorney?” campaign, launched in the mid-1990s, by which the company suggests to persons with possible claims against its policyholders that it may not be absolutely necessary for them to sign up with a lawyer (see Apr. 18, 2000; Dec. 22, 1999). In the state of Connecticut, scene of some of the fiercest skirmishing, the attorneys’ fondest hopes have not been realized: in January a federal judge ruled in Allstate’s favor “on claims it breached an implied contract of good faith and fair dealing, and was engaging in unfair trade practice, unfair insurance practice, recklessness and fraud.” However, it’s not as if the insurer, which is based in Northbrook, Ill., is now free to say whatever it pleases in post-car-crash situations in the Nutmeg State: “In 1996, as president of the Connecticut Trial Lawyers Association, Reardon [New London plaintiffs’ attorney Robert I. Reardon] successfully lobbied for a new law that forbids insurers from discouraging their adversaries from hiring a lawyer.” (Thomas B. Scheffey, “Allstate Victorious in Anti-Lawyer Campaign”, Connecticut Law Tribune, Feb. 2).
Find this man a dictionary
“‘I don’t think censorship is a bad word, but it has become a bad word because everybody associates it with some kind of restriction on liberty,’ said Mr. [Pat] Boone, who is in Washington making the rounds as the national spokesman for the 60-Plus Association, a conservative senior citizen lobby.” (Steve Miller, “Censorship in arts ‘healthy,’ Boone says”, Washington Times, Apr. 21)(via TMFTML).
Admirers of North Korea, at a law school near you
That Kim Jong Il regime, so misunderstood — if the poor dears misbehave, it’s only because the evil United States drove them to it. That’s the gist of a new report (PDF) from the National Lawyers Guild’s “Delegation to the Democratic Peoples Republic Of Korea“. The NLG, which we last discussed Apr. 27, 2000 in connection with its similar views of Castro’s Cuba, is an Old Left remnant which no longer has much visibility (if it ever did) in the world of actual law practice. But it’s surprisingly well organized at law schools, as witness its directory of student chapters and contacts, which lists nearly 100 campuses. FrontPage magazine has run caustic coverage of the group and its latest venture: Shawn Macomber, “North Korean Lawyers Guild”, Apr. 22; Jesse Rigsby, “NLG: The Legal Fifth Column”, Apr. 25, 2003 (also mentions dissension within the group’s ranks). Newmark’s Door, CrosBlog and Milt Rosenberg (scroll) comment.
Am I fired, darling?
Workers at the English National Opera have been banned from using the term of endearment “darling” to each other. “The policy, set out in a document called Dignity at Work, singles out the word ‘darling’ as part of a code of conduct which addresses workplace protocol. It tells employees: ‘The use of affectionate names such as ‘darling’ may constitute sexual harassment.'”. A grievance procedure is available for those who are made uncomfortable by hearing the word. (“‘Darling’ ban for opera workers”, BBC, Apr. 22). A spokesman, however, said there was a grandfather clause: “Existing staff who call each other ‘darling’ can continue to do so but, if someone started here on Monday, they could not.” (“‘Darling’ banned for new workers at English National Opera”, Ananova, Apr. 22). “This is simply guidance for employees — we are protecting ourselves and them,” said spokesman Anthony McNeill. “We live in a litigious society.” (AP/Andante, Apr. 22).
Update: Virginia primitive, cont’d
By margins of more than 2-1, ensuring its enactment into law, both houses of the Virginia legislature have passed HB 751, which would declare null and void all “partnership agreements” between persons of the same sex that “bestow the privileges or obligations of marriage” and bar the enforcement of such agreements (including agreements reached between residents of other states). Critics (see Mar. 19, Apr. 18) and Gov. Mark Warner have warned that the bill may open the door to legal challenges to private contractual arrangements, powers of attorney and similar legal devices when employed between persons of the same sex. Religious right groups hailed the votes; the bill’s sponsor denied that it was intended to affect private contractual arrangements. The bill becomes the law of the Commonwealth July 1. (Christina Nuckols, “Lawmakers restore full ban on gay unions, partnerships”, The Virginian-Pilot, Apr. 22; Michael Sluss, “Warner’s amendments die in House”, Roanoke Times, Apr. 22). More: David Hill, Eric Scheie and Tim Hulsey comment. (Corrected/updated May 6 to clarify final status of bill.) Yet more: May 12, May 31.
Puttin’ on the s. 17200 ritz
A California court of appeal has rejected a lawsuit under the state’s s. 17200 (“unfair competition”) law (see Mar. 12, Dec. 8 and links from there) demanding class-action damages against the Ritz-Carlton hotel chain over its practice of adding an automatic gratuity to room service. Although the claimant conceded that the hotel’s room service menu did warn guests of the charge, he argued that the warning was not in big enough print. And Sacramento sole practitioner Brian Kindsvater, accused of abusing the law, has reached an agreement with the state attorney general’s office to return about $35,000 in settlements from various businesses he sued under s. 17200, including travel agency websites and video stores. “According to the AG’s complaint, Kindsvater helped form a shell corporation called Consumer Action League, which served as plaintiff in the suits. … [The agreement also] also forbids him from making false statements that settling 17200 cases protects defendants from similar actions.” (Jeff Chorney, “Attorney Agrees to Return Unfairly Won Settlements”, The Recorder/New York Lawyer, Mar. 25) (via Tim Sandefur, Apr. 21 and Mar. 25 respectively). Fresh from his resounding political victory in achieving workers’ compensation reform, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is likely to turn his attention to other economic agenda items, among them whether to throw his weight behind an expected business-backed initiative on the November ballot to rein in s. 17200 lawsuits (Marc Lifsher, “Schwarzenegger Has Long To-Do List to Boost Business”. L.A. Times, Apr. 20). One case for s. 17200 reform: Lance T. Izumi (Pacific Research Institute), “Laws, courts unfair to businesses in state”, L.A. Daily News, Apr. 15.