The New York Times and Los Angeles Times are surprised that Article 1, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution should have arisen as a stumbling block to the food safety bill passed by the Senate last week. But as I explain in a new post at Cato at Liberty, they shouldn’t be so surprised.
Author Archive
Blogging about legal blogging
- If you’re thinking of starting in: “A law blogging FAQ” [Venkat Balasubramani] Recommended, even if not new: “Notes on blogging for journalists” from Felix Salmon [July]
- Welcome the Originalism Blog, from Prof. Mike Rappaport’s Constitution Center at the University of San Diego. Acclaimed blogger Mark Herrmann is back, this time at Above the Law. Blogs proliferate on the hot legal area of employment class actions [Trask] Disgraced class-actioneer Bill Lerach has an online column now [John Frith/CJAC, HuffPo]
- A brief history of law blogging [Alex Aldridge, LegalWeek UK] Milestones: Drug and Device Law Blog reaches fourth anniversary (more, Abnormal Use) and Eric Turkewitz reflects on his 1000th post.
- “Lawyer by day, blogger by night:” profile of Anna Berend of Motherly Law [Minneapolis Star-Tribune, and thanks for kind mention]
- Plenty of good reading to be found on ABA’s annual Blawg 100 list despite baffling omissions [Turkewitz, Abnormal Use, Russell Jackson]
- R.I.P: Peter Nordberg, attorney with Philadelphia’s Berger & Montague and a pioneer of online legal commentary with his outstanding site on scientific and expert testimony, Daubert on the Web [Tributes.com obituary, April 2010 but not seen until recently]
$100K battle over pet in condo
A Queens, N.Y. condo owner won her battle to keep her teacup terrier on the premises after a judge found that the condo board had not, as required, obtained the votes of 80 percent of unit owners before adopting a no-pet rule. “The board spent $100,000 on lawyers and the cost is now being passed on to the condo owners — roughly $4,200 apiece. ‘Nobody in the [building] is too happy with me right now because it’s costing everybody a lot of money and it’s not fair to the homeowners, I feel terrible,’ [the winner] said.” [CBS New York]
Takes date horseback riding, gets sued after fall
“I guess you know your date didn’t go very well when you get sued afterward.” [Lowering the Bar; Stanislav v. Papp] Per the New York appellate court’s statement of facts:
Plaintiff was injured when she fell off a horse while on a date with defendant. She alleges that defendant was negligent in failing to properly warn her and appreciate her limited level of skill as a rider, and in failing to pay proper attention to her request that the horses proceed at a slow pace in a careful manner.
The judges, however, upheld a lower court’s dismissal of the case (citations omitted):
Plaintiff has provided no evidence or authority which supports her contention that defendant owed her a duty to insure that the horseback riding experience was safe. As a person with experience riding horses, plaintiff was aware that the risks of falling from a horse or a horse acting in an unintended manner are inherent in the sport. Defendant’s conduct was not so unique or reckless as to create an additional unanticipated risk for plaintiff.
Man drives car into light pole in Wal-Mart parking lot
Is the parking lot of the Newington, N.H. “normal[ly] configured,” had there been earlier drivers who bumped into the pole, and should either point matter in the lawsuit he’s filed as a result? [Seacoast Online via Siouxsie Law]
Self-filed suits work for unemployed New Yorker
A 58-year-old New Yorker “has filed more than 60 lawsuits against government agencies, colleges, creditors, companies and anyone else who has rubbed him the wrong way.” His suits charging discrimination, of which he has filed up to thirteen in a day, often allege failure to accommodate various physical ailments. “‘We don’t even bother asking him for his pass. We just let him in,’ one Manhattan station agent said. ‘I can’t understand how he has so much power.'” [New York Post]
December 4 roundup
- Will they get group discounts on lawyers? Groupon vs. MobGob patent brawl [TechCrunch]
- Why American courts should sometimes recognize Islamic law [series of Eugene Volokh posts]
- No, it’s not a “public health issue”: “The Case Against Motorcycle Helmet Laws” [Steve Chapman, syndicated/RCP]
- Failed system of justice on some Indian reservations [McClelland, Mother Jones]
- Ten years ago: Morgan Lewis & Bockius handed mlb.com domain over to its client Major League Baseball [Ross Davies, SSRN]
- City of Boston adds insult to injury after employee runs into building [TJIC, Popehat]
- Citing fans’ drug use, feds seek forfeiture of farm used for Grateful Dead tribute concerts [Greenfield]
- Johann Sebastian Bach, serial copyright violator [Cavanaugh, Reason]
“Duel over sugar beet seeds could create shortage”
“Court decisions that have suspended the planting of genetically modified sugar beets could result in a sharp decline in American sugar production in the next two years, leading to possible price increases for consumers and food processors, according to experts and farmers.” A judge recently ordered crops uprooted after finding that the planting of genetically altered seed stock had not been accompanied by a proper environmental impact statement. [N.Y. Times, The Recorder, earlier]
Food safety bill update (and welcome readers)
S. 510, which in its various versions has been much criticized in this space, passed the Senate Tuesday by a vote of 73 to 25, but its final passage may be tripped up because it includes new taxes; the Constitution requires that revenue-raising measures originate in the House, and S. 510 didn’t. (More: Reuters, WaPo, USA Today) For more critiques of the bill’s substance, see Ronald Bailey/Reason, Greg Conko/CEI (podcast), and our extensive earlier coverage.
In the mean time there’ve been lots of pixels and ink directed at our recent Cato piece on the subject, including Jonathan Adler/Volokh Conspiracy, Ann Coulter (right-hand links column Dec. 1, flatteringly), Coyote, Michelle Malkin, Ed Morrissey, Hans Bader/CEI, and others; see also Ambreen Ali/Congress.org. Thanks!
Judge rebukes copyright troll RightHaven
The company says it will narrow its filing of infringement suits following a Nevada judge’s ruling that a real estate firm was within acceptable “fair use” limits in handling a copyrighted newspaper story of which it had reprinted the first eight sentences. “Righthaven does not anticipate filing any future lawsuits founded upon infringements of less than 75% of a copyrighted work, regardless of the outcome of the instant litigation,” it said in a court filing. [David Kravets/Wired “Threat Level”, Las Vegas Sun]