It’s getting to be that season. Guest blogging for a week at Overlawyered is a great way to call attention to your blog (you do have one, don’t you?) or dip your toe into blogging if you’ve written in other formats. Return guestbloggers are more than welcome too. If the idea appeals to you, drop me a line at editor – at – [this domain name] – dot – com.
Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category
June 21 roundup
- Okla. AG says scam artists are sending out bogus “you’ve won a class action settlement” notices that could hook unwary recipients [Consumer Affairs]
- Rough on marriages, jobs, and tempers: life as a juror on a thirteen-month trial [Times Online]
- “In some ways, that story represented everything about America: sex, money, and litigation.” [Tina Brown on Anna Nicole saga]
- Baby steps toward consumer protection? When lawyers “go bare” without professional liability insurance, some in Calif. bar think clients should be told [The Recorder]
- Norwalk, Ct. cop who won reinstatement after snatching body part (Jan. 23) is back in the news, and not in a favorable way [Jeff Hall; Advocate, Citizen-News]
- Why RIAA probably needn’t worry that its scattershot suit-filing will expose it to RICO liability [Ars Technica]
- Come to think of it, maybe shooting your husband is worse than serving beer to 16-year-olds [Bader @ WashPost; earlier]
- Michigan woman “slain in the Spirit” at Pentecostal religious service wins suit alleging church was negligent and broke promise by not providing usher to catch her as she fell; defamation claims also figured in suit [Lansing State Journal, Lawyers’ Weekly; compare this case from Australia]
- “Backlash Forms Against ‘Zero Tolerance‘” — well, we can hope [Associated Press]
- New at Point of Law: State Farm moves to disqualify Scruggs in Katrina litigation; honest expert witness spotted?; proposed federal habitat regulation might dwarf current wetlands and species laws; and much more;
- Auctioning off the right to handle a civil case… on eBay? [Five years ago on Overlawyered]
Updates – June 20
Updating a few earlier stories we’ve discussed here…
- Two weeks ago we noted that a new online attorney rating site, Avvo.com, was being threatened with a lawsuit by John Henry Browne, a disgruntled Seattle criminal defense attorney. (Jun. 10). Well, whatever the merits or weaknesses of Browne as an attorney, one thing you can say about him is that he doesn’t make idle threats; last week, he filed suit against Avvo. The suit, designated a class action, contends that Avvo’s ratings are flawed. From all accounts, that’s almost certainly true, but as I mentioned in my previous post, it’s not clear that this presents a valid cause of action; Avvo is entitled to rank lawyers differently than John Henry Browne wants them to. In an attempt to get around this problem, the complaint trots out various “consumer protection” arguments using notoriously vague and broad statutes that don’t require that the plaintiffs identify any consumers who have been harmed. (Illustrating perfectly the phenomenon Ted discussed on Jun. 18).
Oh yes, and Browne also claims in the complaint that “at least two clients” of his fired him (in less than a week!) because of his “average” rating on Avvo. Let’s just say I’m rather skeptical of Mr. Browne’s ability to prove such a claim.
The law firm handling this class action case? Overlawyered multiple repeat offender Hagens Berman. (Many links.)
- Remember that lawsuit where Illinois Chief Justice Robert Thomas sued the Kane County Chronicle for defamation? (Apr. 2, Nov. 2006) Well, when last we heard, the libel award — originally an absurd $7 million — had been reduced to $4 million by the trial judge. Not surprisingly, the Chronicle still is unsatisfied, and does not feel it can get a fair shake from the very Illinois court system headed by Thomas; it has now filed a federal lawsuit claiming its constitutional rights have been violated. Named in the suit are Thomas, the trial judge who heard the case, and the rest of Thomas’s colleagues on the state Supreme Court.
- Kellogg’s bows to threats of frivolous litigation coming from the Center for “Science” in the “Public Interest”; agrees to limit advertising of its cereals to children.
Of course, this is portrayed as an issue of advertising, but as Michael Jacobson of CSPI admits, this litigation strategy is simply an attempt to drive products he disapproves of from the market. And now that Kellogg’s has capitulated, certain politicians are trying to force other companies to do the same.
Originally: Jan. 2006.
- We had previously reported (May 17) that the unfair competition lawsuit between Equal and Splenda had settled. Turns out that the two sides are still fighting, with each side accusing the other of reneging on the deal. (LI)
“Builders, Contractors Hammer Consumer Sites”
In two separate New Jersey cases, building contractors RSA Enterprises and WBG Builders are suing websites that carried consumer complaints about them; in a third case in Maryland, a suit by SCS Contracting Group names as defendant the well-known site Angie’s List, which compiles user reviews of home-improvement services. (Truman Lewis, ConsumerAffairs.com, May 4). More: John Kelly, “Homeowner’s Web Gripe Draws Contractor Lawsuit”, Washington Post, Mar. 13 (SCS Contracting versus Angie’s List); Eric Goldman, Apr. 25 (RSA Enterprises versus Rip-Off Report, and Google). P.S. Eric Goldman adds further details.
Oz: “Gambler loses, sues casino”
Behrouz Foroughi, 43, says he volunteered for the exclusion list at the Star City casino and was told he would be denied entry, but was admitted anyway and lost large sums due to his gambling compulsion. (Gemma Jones, Daily Telegraph, Jun. 19). Similar claims have been tried a number of times in the U.S. but without much success: see Apr. 28, 2004, Apr. 19, 2005, Nov. 22, 2005 (France), etc.
Flashback: the tort system in action in the case of Curtis Campbell
In 1981, Curtis Campbell (Campbell) was driving with his wife, Inez Preece Campbell, in Cache County, Utah. He decided to pass six vans traveling ahead of them on a two-lane highway. Todd Ospital was driving a small car approaching from the opposite direction. To avoid a head-on collision with Campbell, who by then was driving on the wrong side of the highway and toward oncoming traffic, Ospital swerved onto the shoulder, lost control of his automobile, and collided with a vehicle driven by Robert G. Slusher. Ospital was killed, and Slusher was rendered permanently disabled. The Campbells escaped unscathed.
Guess quickly: which plaintiff in the resulting twenty years of litigation won the biggest jury verdict?
How many of you say Ospital?
How many of you say Slusher?
You’re both wrong. The plaintiff with the biggest jury verdict was Curtis Campbell, whom a jury awarded an incredible $147.6 million.
Biting the hand that feeds us
Strangely missing from the blog ad about the book “Supreme Discomfort” is a link to the review by Edward Whelan. See also Matthew Franck and John A. Foster-Bey.
Update: Kia Franklin and Roy Pearson and the $67 million pants
I’d like to make a correction. In my earlier post, I suggested that Milberg Weiss Justice Fellow Kia Franklin thought that Judge Roy Pearson’s $67 million lawsuit over a pair of pants was frivolous. I appear to have been mistaken in attributing such a common-sense view to her. Franklin has a lengthy post protesting that, while she thinks Pearson’s lawsuit is “ridiculous” and “crazy” (she has also called it “obscene”), she does not think it is “frivolous.” We regret the error.
But it is a useful illustration: when those who oppose civil justice reform say they don’t think frivolous litigation is a problem, it is because they define “frivolous litigation” so narrowly that even Roy Pearson’s lawsuit is not frivolous in their eyes. Well, that’s one way to make problems go away, by using doublespeak or narrow technical legal definitions to pretend they don’t exist instead of suggesting that there is a problem with the narrow technical legal definition.
Oz high court: restaurant review was defamatory
Now it’s Australia where food writers are getting nervous: the country’s High Court decided that Sydney Morning Herald critic Matthew Evans had defamed the Coco Roco restaurant in 2003 in a review:
The flavours of the limoncello oysters “jangled like a car crash”, he wrote, while the sherry-scented apricot white sauce on a steak was a “wretched garnish”.
Overall, he concluded that “more than half the dishes I’ve tried at Coco Roco are simply unpalatable”.
The ruling does not however preclude the defendants from offering defenses as proceedings continue in the case. (Deborah Cameron and Helen Westerman, “Ruling leaves sour taste for food critics”, Melbourne Age, Jun. 15; Barbara McMahon, “Review of meal that ‘jangled like a car crash’ deemed defamatory”, The Guardian, Jun. 16). Eoin O’Dell at the Irish law site Cearta.ie has assembled a substantial links list on this and earlier restaurant-review lawsuits from various countries (Jun. 16). Previously at this site: Mar. 10, etc.
Pearsonesque $2 billion consumer-fraud lawsuit against Ford
The Ford Explorer is a sport utility vehicle. Judge Roy Pearson, excited by the $67 million he anticipates receiving for his pants, is bringing a lawsuit in California claiming that every California Explorer owner is entitled a total of $2 billion from Ford because the Explorer is allegedly prone to rolling over, using the California version of the law that Pearson is bringing his pants-suit over. Note that the damages are not for an actual rollover, just damages because of the “fraud” that the vehicle might roll over, though at least some models of the Explorer are in fact less dangerous than an average SUV in rollovers, and safer than the average vehicle in other types of accidents. (IIHS reports that the average fatality rate for mid-sized 2-door SUVs is 63 per million vehicles, and the average fatality rate for the 2-door Ford Explorer is 49 per million vehicles—and that latter number includes crashes caused by defective Firestone tires. Note that this is publicly available information: where is the fraud?)
Oh, sorry, it’s not Roy Pearson, it’s Arkansas attorney Tab Turner who is bringing the lawsuit. [Hudson Sangree, “SUV rollovers put Ford’s future in judge’s hands”, Sacramento Bee, May 24; official class notice from Sacramento County Court]
But because ATLA and Kia Franklin have condemned Roy Pearson’s lawsuit as a frivolous abuse of justice, I am sure that they will have no compunction against issuing the same criticism against millionaire trial lawyer Tab Turner for bringing a much larger and socially harmful lawsuit that might bankrupt Ford on the same bogus “consumer fraud” legal theory that Pearson used. Of course, there’s a difference between Pearson and Turner: Turner is asking for more money, and his claim has less factual basis.