Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

On the whiplash trail

Might become a rich source of material for this site: Attorney Jonathan G. Stein of Elk Grove, Calif. has launched a blog on “Litigating MIST Cases,” MIST in this case standing for “Minimum Injury, Soft Tissue” auto-crash cases, or, in practical terms, “Any car crash with less than $1,500 in property damage and a soft tissue type injury, i.e. neck or back pain, sometimes called ‘whiplash.'” (Claims of “soft tissue” injury, unlike those from bruises, lacerations or broken bones, typically are hard or impossible to verify to the satisfaction of all sides). One recent entry begins: “Face it, most MIST patients end up at a chiropractor. …the chiropractor always asks who the attorney is on the file.” An earlier entry promises to explain “how the chiropractor can treat the patient to help you accomplish your goal — obtain a fair and reasonable settlement for your client.”

Stein is also selling a book on the handling of these cases and promotes it as follows:

I just settled a case. Client was in an accident causing no visible damage to her vehicle. The defendant had less than $500 in damage to her car. Client had $2,200 in treatment. Settlement pre-lit: $8,500. That is almost four times the special damages. On a MIST case.

So, yes, this system works.

Per Stein’s biographical blurb, “Most of his practice consists of MIST cases.” More on chiropractors here, and more on whiplash here.

Dan Rather vs. CBS, cont’d

Beldar doesn’t hold back (Sept. 22) from telling us what he thinks:

Rather’s case — as incredibly, stinkingly, appallingly, cosmically bogus as it is — nevertheless has some considerable settlement value: Not because CBS is likely to lose to Rather if the truth is confirmed in court, but because individual decision-makers within CBS may have overwhelming vested interests in ensuring that the facts are not thoroughly probed in court.

Earlier: Sept. 19. More buzz: Howard Kurtz/WaPo, Eugene Volokh, New York Post “Page Six”, Bertovici/Portfolio.com.

Big Government, Big Business, and artisanal food

Alex Cockburn a few years back, quoted by Jacob Sullum at Reason “Hit and Run” (Sept. 17):

A lot of the history of food regulation in this country has turned out to be a way to finish off small, quality producers by demanding they invest in whatever big ticket items the USDA happens to be in love with at the time; said love objects usually turning out to be whatever the big food processors are using. That’s the reason why it’s hard to get decent sausages or hams….The big packers and processing plants get to participate directly in the writing of the laws that set the standard practices that the inspectors march out to enforce on all the little producers not part of the Meat Syndicate.

Latest Pearson Pants update

A press release from their lawyers, Manning & Sossamon, announces that the Chung family of Washington, D.C is closing Custom Cleaners, their dry cleaning establishment. They continue to operate a separate location under the name of Happy Cleaners and last year closed one known as Parks FabriCare. According to the release, the family decided to close Custom Cleaners “due to the revenue losses and emotional toll resulting from the Pearson v. Chung lawsuit”. More: Marc Fisher @ WaPo, WSJ law blog, Betsy Newmark, Joe Gandelman, Mark Steyn.

Lerach’s guilty plea

Following up on Walter’s Sep. 18 roundup, Lerach should be proud of his lawyers: his plea deal is for a single count of mispaying Steven Cooperman, drops all of the Torkelsen-related charges, will likely get him out of prison in under two years, requires the government to forgo prosecution of his current law partners, and doesn’t require him to cooperate with the prosecution of Melvyn Weiss. He may well be disbarred afterwards, but he’ll also be a multimillionaire in his late sixties who can retire comfortably even after paying an $8 million fine, and nothing stops plaintiffs’ firms from offering small fortunes to Lerach to act as a “non-legal consultant.” [plea agreement; WSJ; The Recorder; NY Times]

Relatedly, Wired reprints its 1996 “Bloodsucking Scumbag” article.

By reader acclaim: “Nebraska state senator sues God”

Sen. Ernie Chambers does not deny the silliness of his complaint against Jehovah over natural disasters and the like, but says it’s meant to make a serious point. You might think that the point would have to be how little sense it makes to give anyone the power to sue anyone over anything, but it turns out that Sen. Chambers actually opposes proposals in Nebraska to restrict the filing of meritless lawsuits, and thinks, with perhaps elusive logic, that his stunt somehow will make people agree with him on that. (KPTM with filing in PDF format, KETV, FoxNews.com, AP/Omaha.com, Volokh). The best picture to run with the story is definitely the Apr. 12, 2006 file photo at MyWay/AP News. Update Oct. 15, 2008: judge throws out suit.

“Judge tosses global warming lawsuit against car makers”

A major rebuke for former California AG Bill Lockyer and his successor, Jerry Brown, as well: “A federal judge in San Francisco today threw out a lawsuit filed by the state Attorney General’s office against the six largest automakers in what had been billed as a novel attempt to hold the companies financially liable for global warming. … U.S. District Judge Martin Jenkins said it would be inappropriate for the court to wade into issues pertaining to interstate commerce and foreign policy – matters that should be left to the political branches of government.” The judge’s order can be found here (PDF). (Henry K. Lee, San Francisco Chronicle, Sept. 18)(cross-posted from Point of Law).

Examiner series on trial lawyers

The Examiner, the newspaper chain with outlets in Washington, San Francisco and other cities, kicks off a five-part series on “Lawyers Gone Wild” with a package of articles including “Is There a Doctor in the House…Who Hasn’t Been Sued?“, “High-dollar settlements mark class action cases“, “Little relief: Litigation costs rising as firms face fewer suits“, and “Rogues gallery of class action attorneys“. I’m mentioned, as is this site, in the last of these articles, and my colleagues James Copland and the Manhattan Institute Center for Legal Policy are mentioned in the articles on class actions and litigation costs. The authors are Cheryl Chumley and Washington Examiner editorial page editor (and blogger) Mark Tapscott.

Four more installments are slated in the series. To quote the newspaper:

* Sept. 21 – Buying political power and friends in high places
* Sept. 28 – How they do it
* Oct. 5 – Hard times in super lawyer land
* Oct. 12 – Securities lawyers’ heads we win/tails you lose deal for corporate America

(cross-posted, with slight alterations, from Point of Law).