Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

A good burger is hard to find

complains the LA Times’ David Shaw, who is surprised to find that most restaurants won’t serve him a hamburger cooked rare, or even medium-rare. With a little research, he finds that nothing in California law prohibits serving a burger rare if a customer asks for it, but he’s bound to be disappointed when he discovers that that’s not the cause: the chefs aren’t obeying a bureaucrat’s nanny-state directive, but orders from corporate headquarters to avoid lawsuits from customers who exercise their choice and complain later.

Earlier burger coverage: Sep. 30 and links therein.

Gerry Spence’s Trial Lawyers College

The Wyoming injury lawyer is known for his extended rants on the theme of the People versus the Interests, which makes it piquant to see his name turn up so prominently among exploiters of a federal tax provision intended to benefit the needy, in this case — through his Trial Lawyers College — allowing him to maintain his control over a spectacular 220-acre ranch while dodging the taxman. ABC News has the details (Jake Tapper and Avery Miller, “Wealthy Cash In on Charity Tax Loophole”, Mar. 24). Trial lawyer/blogger Mike Cernovich, a satisfied customer of Spence’s seminar operation, praised it here, while his co-blogger Norm Pattis more recently noted the tax-avoidance story.

Lotteries about lotteries

Because of a misprinted number in a New York Daily News circulation-boosting game called Scratch n’ Match, hundreds of people thought they’d won the top $100,000 prize. The rules printed on the back of each ticket specify that there is to be no liability “in the event of printing, production or other error”, but Queens attorney Steven Gildin says the News can’t “cower behind fine print”: “Thousands of people thought they had their shot at the American dream”. And now, to give them that shot, he and other lawyers are preparing lawsuits. “A lot of people keep their hopes alive on these lotteries,” said one of Gildin’s law partners referring, it would seem from context, to the scratch-off tickets rather than the courtroom filings. (Clyde Haberman, “American Dreaming? Take a Number”, New York Times, Apr. 1).

San Francisco to vote on regulating blogging

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors will vote April 5 on a proposed campaign finance regulation that would define “electioneering communication” to include weblogs that receive more than 500 hits from San Francisco voters. There would be a disclosure requirement (that must be made in a 14-point typeface) and potential reporting requirements. (via Southern California Law Blog and Personal Democracy Forum).

American Justice Partnership

This new organization, among other functions, serves as a clearinghouse for the latest information about litigation reform efforts around the country; its site has updates on the recent progress of such legislation in Missouri, South Carolina, Florida and elsewhere. The AJP also recently produced an audio feature (downloadable/streamable) in which three of us (myself, Steven B. Hantler of the DaimlerChrysler Corp., and Fox News commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano) discuss the topic, specifically from the standpoint of: what can a business person do to make a difference? If you’re interested in the ongoing battle over litigation reform, you’ll want to spend some time checking out the whole site.

“Reduced-sugar” cereals not healthier? Sue

A San Diego mother is suing the makers of such cereals as Trix, Cocoa Puffs and Froot Loops “seeking class-action status for all consumers in the state who bought the low-sugar cereals thinking they were healthier than full-sugar versions.” The manufacturers, her suit alleges, substitute other refined carbohydrates for the missing sugar, leaving calorie count and nutritional value little changed. (“Mother sues cereal makers over ‘lower-sugar’ slogan”, AP/Pasadena Star-News, Mar. 28; Greg Moran, “Mother sues over cereal nutrition”, AP/San Diego Union-Tribune, Mar. 29; “Mother sues over ‘deceiving’ cereal labels”, ABCNews.com, Mar. 30). Among those who wonder why she couldn’t have looked more closely at the nutrition label in the first place: Christine Hurt, GeoBandy, and commenters at DrudgeRetort. See also Mr. Sun.

Traffic-cams

Radley Balko has more (Mar. 22, Mar. 23, Mar. 31, and again Mar. 31) on how the use of these devices tends to turn criminality into a carefully cultivated cash cow. For more, see Mar. 10, 2004 (and links from there) and Jul. 22, 2004.

While at The Agitator, check out the news of legislative proposals to confiscate for a month cars with overly loud radios (Mar. 22; Contra Costa County, Calif.) and (over-)regulate online dating services (Mar. 20; California legislature).

FEC and blogs

If you happen to blog about political/campaign issues from your employer’s computer at work, watch out: you may be caught in the web of campaign-finance regulation under draft rules from the Federal Election Commission. (Eugene Volokh, Mar. 23; Ryan Sager, “Mice and Free-Speech Cookies”, New York Post, Mar. 30; Log and Line; Captain’s Quarters). For more, see Mar. 4 and Mar. 17. More: May 20.

“Stalingrad” divorce tactics

In a rancorous fourteen-month divorce trial, John Ofori-Tenkorang disputed the existence of his marriage to Jacqueline Anom, claiming marriage photos had been falsified; claimed to have routinely thrown away bank records, failing to disclose what the judge concluded were assets exceeding $1.7 million; and “wouldn’t stipulate that he wasn’t a close relative of his wife’s, or under the care of a conservator — two grounds for invalidating a marriage, forcing those issues to be proven in court.” Judge Kevin Tierney compared Ofori-Tenkorang’s tenacious assertion of legal issues to the 1942 battle deep inside Russia: “German troops surrounded the Soviet city of Stalingrad on the Volga River. They used aerial attacks, artillery bombardment and intensive panzer assaults. The city was reduced to rubble. Virtually no building stood.” (Thomas B. Scheffey, “‘Stalingrad’ Defense Tactics Prove Costly in Divorce Case”, Connecticut Law Tribune, Mar. 28).

More: reader (and historian) John Steele Gordon (his site) writes:

It sounds like the judge is a better jurist than a historian. Stalingrad, backed by the Volga River, wasn’t surrounded. That’s how the Russians were able to resupply their troops and hold the city. Then, with Zhukov’s offensive, in November, 1942, it was the Germans who were surrounded and trapped in the Stalingrad pocket.