Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Update: Erin Brockovich vs. Beverly Hills High School

After the glamourpuss tort-chaser’s campaign over environmental contamination at the high school met with one reverse after another in court, ending in a judicial ruling of no merit, plaintiff’s lawyers have now agreed to reimburse the city and school district of Beverly Hills for a not insignificant chunk of their legal expenses in defending the claims, in the sum of $450,000. As readers of this site know, prevailing defendants very seldom recover fees from losing plaintiffs or their lawyers in American litigation. The Civil Justice Association of California has details (Oct. 9).

This summer Viking published a book by journalist Joy Horowitz entitled Parts Per Million: The Poisoning of Beverly Hills High School which, as its subtitle implies, would appear to place much credence in the lawsuits’ claims of disease causation from oil wells on the high school campus (undated L.A. Times review by Robin Abcarian). For the side of the story that proved more convincing to the courts, see the work of Norma Zager and Eric Umansky here and here as well as this article in Time. Brockovich herself, incidentally, now has a blog of her own.

Roy Pearson no longer a D.C. judge

National Journal’s The Gate has the story on the latest setback for the pants judge (Nov. 14). A committee concluded that he did not demonstrate “appropriate judgment and judicial temperament,” but apparently did not specifically invoke the Breeches of Doom affair. Our coverage is here.

Federici v. U-Haul update: jury awards $15 million

Following up on the story Jason Barney wrote about Oct. 25: a Seattle jury has awarded $15 million to the woman gravely injured when an improperly secured entertainment center fell off a rented U-Haul trailer and through her windshield. “U-Haul was ordered to pay 67 percent of the total amount and the balance is to be paid by James Hefley, the man who rented the U-Haul trailer. Jurors did not find the company that rented the trailer to Hefley or Federici liable. … Federici’s attorneys argued that U-Haul knowingly rented a poorly designed trailer that in which loads could not be secured. They said that the trailer could have been made safer with a cargo net or higher tailgates and that U-Haul knew there had a been a number of similar incidents.” (Christine Clarridge, “Woman hit by unsecured load awarded $15 million”, Seattle Times, Nov. 9).

Traffic-cams and road safety, cont’d

More damning evidence on a subject on which there’s been plenty already (Sept. 6, 2001, Sept. 24, 2006, etc.; Oct. 31, 2006): “a study by the Federal Highway Administration and the Virginia Department documented a 12 percent increase in rear-enders at Northern Virginia intersections where cameras enforced red-light violations. Although proponents of cameras contend the number of such accidents decreases as motorists become used to this new enforcement technology, the study says that isn’t so. Meanwhile, simply extending the time that the traffic light stays yellow helps reduce violations and accidents. However, that solution isn’t necessarily popular with towns that see red-light tickets as a revenue source, the [Miami] Herald says.” (Martha Neil, “Traffic Cameras Mean More Rear-Enders”, ABA Journal, Oct. 31; Larry Lebowitz, “Red-light cameras a signal for war”, Miami Herald, Oct. 29).

November 7 roundup

The case for the telecom immunity bill II

John Ashcroft in the New York Times:

One of our nation’s most important comparative advantages over our adversaries is the creativity and robustness of the private sector. To cut ourselves off from that advantage would amount to a form of unilateral disarmament.

Yet if we allow the litigation to continue, that is precisely what we will do. The message that will be sent to American companies is that they can be exposed to crippling lawsuits for helping the government with national security activities that they are explicitly assured are legal. The only rational response would be for companies to adopt an attitude of extreme wariness, even in the most urgent or clear-cut situations. To put the matter plainly, this puts American lives at risk.

Earlier.

“Wetzel Law Firm: Retract ‘Weasel’ or Else”

“Threatened with a potential defamation suit, two individuals have apparently retracted their claimed characterization of a Spokane, Wash.-area law firm formerly known as ‘Wetzel & Wetzel’ as ‘Weasel & Weasel.'” Jim MacDonald, president of the Bayview, Idaho Chamber of Commerce, “read a letter of contrition” at the chamber’s regular monthly meeting “as demanded” by the offended lawyers. Does this mean we’re going to get in trouble with our earlier references to Cruel & Boring, We’ll Getcha & Mangle Ya, Huge Cupboards of Greed, etc.? (Martha Neil, ABA Journal, Oct. 25; Herb Huseland, “Bayview News: Law firm claims slander”, Spokane Statesman-Review, Oct. 25).

P.S. Australian lawyer Stumbling Tumblr adds, “there’s no indication in the story whether weasels had also threatened proceedings”.