Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

“Hundreds upon hundreds and hundreds of fake accidents”

Philadelphia authorities have indicted Center City lawyer D. Allen Litt and 14 others over what they say was a quarter-century-old scheme of bogus personal injury claims employing 100 runners and working with about ten physicians. Slip-falls were a favorite: “He would send his runners to look for cracks in sidewalks in front of businesses large and small, supermarkets, large drugstore chains, mom-and-pop stores, any commercial business whatsoever,” said Philadelphia D.A. Lynne Abraham. “The imposters would obtain medical care from physicians selected by Litt and rack up inflated medical bills via numerous visits to the Litt-selected doctors, the grand jury charged,” per the Legal Intelligencer. Some claimants had genuine injuries incurred elsewhere which they brought to the scene of the intended staging. “Abraham said Litt would pay people fees ranging from a couple of hundred to a thousand dollars to find the sites and stage the fake accidents. The lawsuits would yield thousands of dollars for Litt, officials said.” (Vernon Clark, “Lawyer charged with running 25-year fraud”, Philadelphia Inquirer, Dec. 12; Amaris Elliott-Engel, “Pa. Attorney Charged in Insurance Fraud Case”, The Legal Intelligencer, Dec. 13).

Senate Dems: Trial lawyers’ pockets more important than anti-terrorism legislation

Amid deep and growing divisions among Senate Democrats, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) last night abruptly withdrew [the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that would have also] granted the nation’s telecommunications companies retroactive immunity from lawsuits charging they had violated privacy rights.

(Jonathan Weisman and Paul Kane, “Telecom Immunity Issue Derails Spy Law Overhaul”, Washington Post, Dec. 18). Reid had previously promised to pass the bill this month, but a handful of Democratic senators, most notably Dodd and Kennedy, threatened to block the bill because of the immunity provision. Reid had the votes to pass it (a filibuster attempt failed 76-10), but chose not to. Earlier: Nov. 5 and Oct. 31.

Update: Were the government’s actions were illegal? Maybe, though reasonable minds can differ. But the question is different from the one of the dynamic consequences of finding private liability here. If corporations are held liable every time they agree to cooperate with the government on a national-security issue that is potentially ambiguous, they just won’t cooperate at all without a court order. Perhaps that is the rule we want going forward. But if so, that policy choice should be the decision of Congress, not of unaccountable trial lawyers—and if it is the rule Congress wants, they should state it explicitly, so voters can hold them accountable for the consequences, rather than hiding behind trial-lawyer surrogates that later reward them for the earmarks to the trial bar. Should trial lawyers make terrorism policy?

December 18 roundup

  • “Of all the body parts to Xerox!” Another round of stories on efforts to reduce liabilities from office holiday parties [ABA Journal, Above the Law, and relatedly Megan McArdle]
  • New edition of Tillinghast/Towers Perrin study on insurance costs of liability system finds they went down last year, which doesn’t happen often [2007 update, PDF]
  • Vermont student sues Burger King over indelicate object found in his sandwich; one wonders whether he’s ruled out it being a latex finger cot, sometimes used by bakery workers [AP/FoxNews.com]
  • Good discussions of “human rights commission” complaints against columnist Mark Steyn in Canada [Volokh, David Warren and again @ RCP, Dan Gardner; for a contrasting view, see Wise Law Blog]
  • Having trousered $60-odd million in fees suing Microsoft in Minnesota and Iowa antitrust cases, Zelle Hofmann now upset after judge says $4 million in fees should suffice for Wisconsin me-too action [Star-Tribune, PheistyBlog]
  • Australian rail operator will appeal order to pay $A600,000 to man who illegally jumped tracks, spat at ticket inspectors, hurt himself fleeing when detained [Herald Sun]
  • Lawyers’ fees in Kia brake class action (Oct. 29, Oct. 30) defended by judge who assails honesty of chief defense witness [Legal Intelligencer]
  • Who deserves credit for founding Facebook? Question is headed for court [02138 mag]
  • Yes, jury verdicts do sometimes bankrupt defendants, as did this $8 million class action award against a Kansas City car dealer [KC Star, KC Business Journal]
  • Dispute over Burt Neuborne’s Holocaust fees is finally over, he’ll get $3.1 million [NY Sun]
  • So long as we’re only fifty votes behind in the race for this “best general legal blog” honor, we’re going to keep nagging you to vote for Overlawyered [if you haven’t already]

Christmas shopping suggestions

Always worth pointing out this time of year: if you use our Amazon bookstore to buy holiday presents, a portion of your shopping outlays go to support the work of this site. Better yet, why not buy your friends (or yourself?) some food for thought in the form of books and other products related to our themes here? Not to be excessively self-promotional, but my book The Rule of Lawyers of not long ago is once again relevant to current headlines in a big way, given the close look it takes at Mississippi’s Richard (Dickie) Scruggs and the tobacco and asbestos lawsuits that made his fortune. If you check the right-hand column of our front page, you’ll also see ShopThisBlog.com, which offers a thoughtfully designed and easy to use guide to buying many books mentioned in this space.

Another book we’ve had occasion to mention here (well before its publisher bought an ad!) is Adam Freedman’s well-received The Party of the First Part, on the oddities of the language we sometimes call “legalese” (Aug. 22). And don’t forget the much-acclaimed DVD A Lawyer Walks Into a Bar (Sept. 28), which includes me as an interviewee in the bonus material.

Consumer and employee win rates in arbitration

For example, a study published in the Dispute Resolution Journal compared 125 employment discrimination lawsuits filed in the Southern District of New York, with 186 arbitration claims involving employment disputes in the securities industry. The data showed that employee claimants prevailed 46% of the time in arbitration compared to 34% in federal court. The median monetary award amount was slightly higher in arbitration, and the median time from filing to judgment was 16.5 months in arbitration compared to 25 months in litigation.

Also, a 1998 comparison of arbitration and litigation published in the Columbia Human Rights Law Review noted that employees prevailed over employers in 63% of employment arbitration cases filed with the American Arbitration Association between 1993 and 1995. To compare, only 14.9% of employees who brought cases to federal district court in 1994 prevailed in their litigation. The average duration of an arbitrated claim was 8.6 months, compared to 2.5 years in litigation.

Source, citing Michael Delikat & Morris M. Kleiner, An Empirical Study of Dispute Resolution Mechanisms: Where Do Plaintiffs Better Vindicate Their Rights?, 58 DISPUTE RESOLUTION JOURNAL 56, 57-58 (2004); and Lewis L. Maltby, Private Justice: Employment Arbitration and Civil Rights, 30 COLUM. HUM. RTS. L. REV. 29, 45-48 (1998).

California data shows that when consumers bring arbitration claims against businesses, the consumers prevail in 65.5% of cases that reach a decision. To compare, buyer plaintiffs litigating contract claims in the 75 largest American counties prevailed 61.5% of the time overall, and 60.9% of the time in cases decided by bench trials. When businesses bring arbitration claims against California consumers, the businesses prevail in 77.7% of cases that reach a decision. To compare, seller plaintiffs litigating contract cases in the largest 75 counties prevail 76.8% of the time overall and 78.9% of the time in cases decided by bench trial.

These results show that the win rates for consumers and businesses bringing claims in arbitration are within just a few percentage points – and, sometimes, just fractions of a percentage point – of the win rates of individuals and businesses bringing contract claims in court.

Source. See also the Ernst and Young study showing consumers doing better in arbitration than in court. More data available at the National Arbitration Forum page.

Update, Dec. 17: The National Arbitration blog has more links, and the blog appears to be chock-full of resources. For other Overlawyered posts on arbitration, see our new arbitration section.

Arbitration and the free market

Let us imagine a writer for a left-wing magazine, we’ll call her Mephanie Stencimer, who wants to buy a car. But she has particular tastes: she doesn’t just want any old car. She wants a three-wheeled vehicle, perhaps because the feng shui is better, perhaps because she wants to spend less money on tires forced upon her by Big Rubber. She goes from car-dealer to car-dealer around town, but every single one of the dastardly businessmen insist that her only choice is a four-wheeled vehicle. She patiently explains the aesthetics of the triangular approach, but they shrug their shoulders and tell her it’s out of their hands and she has to have a four-wheeled car or nothing. Finally, she surrenders her preference for the three-wheeled vehicle, and takes a model with the extra wheel.

If you were to take seriously the arguments of Stephanie Mencimer at Mother Jones and the commenters there, and perhaps the occasional judge, this is an outrageous “contract of adhesion” that should be outlawed: Stencimer didn’t have a choice, didn’t have the bargaining power to make the auto-dealer sell her a three-wheeled car, and was forced to buy an extra wheel. But is this really a problematic failure of the market that requires government intervention?

Read On…