“Now it is official: The United States of America has a federal bureaucracy in charge of deciding who can say what about politicians during campaign season. We can argue, and people do, about whether this state of affairs is good or bad, better or worse than some alternative. What is inarguable is that America now has what amounts to a federal speech code, enforced with jail terms of up to five years.” (Jonathan Rauch, National Journal/Reason, Oct. 7). More: Columnist/blogger Dan Kennedy is troubled by efforts to charge the management of the Sinclair Broadcast Group with campaign finance violations (and maybe even subject them to criminal prosecution) for airing a documentary highly critical of Democratic candidate John Kerry (“Media Log: A Small Matter of Free Speech”, Boston Phoenix, Oct. 12). More on Sinclair and the FCC: Ron Orol, “Sinclair Uproar Threatens Purchase of TV Stations”, The Deal, Oct. 22.
Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category
Update: PetsWarehouse again
In the latest development in one of the Internet’s most celebrated and protracted legal disputes (Apr. 8 and links from there), pet store owner Robert Novak has announced that the Alabama Supreme Court has dismissed a default judgment against him arising from a case filed by attorney John Benn of Sheffield, Ala. Novak has also regained control of the domain petswarehouse.com, which had for a while been taken over by his adversaries. The controversy originally arose when Novak sued members of a listserv who had expressed dissatisfaction with their experience as customers of his Long Island-based pet store; he has also sued a widening circle of list operators, search engines and other online intermediaries. See PetsWarehouse site; press release, Oct. 5; Defense Fund; PetsForum; Dynamoo.
Dazed and Confused
If you see Bobby Wooderson, Andy Slater or Richard Floyd of Huntsville, Texas, don’t ask them if they wanna smoke a joint. The three former classmates of “Before Sunset” director Richard Linklater have decided, eleven years after the fact, that the Linklater movie “Dazed and Confused” defames them by using similarly named characters. As evidence of his emotional distress, Wooderson cites the fact that his son was asked for autographs by his Harvard classmates. (But how did they find out if his son wasn’t bragging about the coincidence?) Another plaintiff told a desk clerk that he was “the guy from ‘Dazed and Confused'” and was supposedly mobbed by a lobby full of fans–no doubt because New Yorkers are so enthralled by the sight of such a celebrity. The three are so upset that people associate them with a movie that did $8 million in box office in 1993 that before they served Linklater with the suit, they had their attorneys issue a nationally-publicized press release. They’ve sued in New Mexico, because Texas law doesn’t allow one to wait eleven years before suing for defamation. Actor Wiley Wiggins complains about “the sad sacks back in Huntsville who are trying to cash in 11 years later over vaguely having something to do with a movie.” (Andrew Tran, “Modified names spur ‘Dazed’ lawsuit”, Daily Texan, Oct. 12; Tom Waddill, “Three Huntsville residents file suit over negative resemblances in popular cult film”, Huntsville Item, Oct. 11; Chris Rush Cohen blog, Oct. 8).
Full disclosure: I once represented co-defendant Universal years ago. But that was about the Grinch.
Posting lull
I’m headed out for my Southern California speaking tour, and expect to be absent from this site for the next week or perhaps a bit more. Ted will be here, though. See you soon.
NYC radio, tonight and tomorrow
Voices of moderation dept.: RFK Jr.
Prof. Jonathan Adler of Case Western attends a speech given at Case by celebrity environmentalist Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and blogs the hothead scion’s frothy rant (Sept. 30). (Kennedy on the media, per Adler: “They should all drink poison Kool Aid and restore integrity to their profession.”) Kennedy was widely ridiculed two years ago for repeatedly asserting that large hog-raising operations are a greater threat to American democracy than Osama bin Laden (see Apr. 19-21, 2002) and if Adler’s account is accurate, the embarrassment has by no means abated.
Malpractice discussion wrap-up
Over at Point of Law, the featured discussion has now wrapped up between Dr. Ron Chusid of Doctors for Kerry and our own Ted Frank on the presidential race and medical malpractice reform. If you haven’t looked at the exchange yet, you’ll find that it conveys a wealth of information about the state of the medical liability debate. Not surprisingly, I found Ted persuasive in arguing that Bush has the sounder position on this issue (which still doesn’t mean I’m going to vote for him).
White Castle onion rings
Michael Strauss says he bit into one of them at a Bourbonnais, Ill. outlet of the burger chain and hot grease squirted out onto his arm. Can he have a sum in excess of $50,000, please? (Steve Patterson, “White Castle lawsuit has familiar ring”, Chicago Sun-Times, Sept. 30).
Fall speaking schedule
I’ll be speaking this evening (Thurs. Sept. 30) in Baltimore as part of a dinner-hour panel discussion on medical malpractice reform sponsored by the Chesapeake Lawyers’ Chapter of the Federalist Society. Other events scheduled for this fall (sponsored by the Federalist Society unless otherwise specified):
* Mon. Oct. 11, Whittier Law School, Costa Mesa, Calif.
* Tues. Oct. 12, Chapman Law School, Orange, Calif. (lunch) and Trinity Law School, Santa Ana, Calif. (late afternoon)
* Thurs. Oct. 14, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Washington, D.C., Legal Reform Summit, debating Bob Levy of Cato on federalism and litigation reform
* Wed. Nov. 10, Cato Institute, Washington, D.C., commenting on publication of Bob Levy’s new book Shakedown
* Fri., Nov. 12, Federalist Society National Lawyers Convention, Washington, D.C., panel discussion on regulation by litigation with (among others) former Mississippi Attorney General Michael Moore and Michigan Supreme Court Justice Robert Young, Jr.;
* week of Nov. 15 (exact date TBA), Fordham Law School, New York City.
To inquire about our availability for speaking engagements, email editor – at – [this-domain-name] for me or tedfrank – at – [this-domain-name] for Ted.
Okay, towns: build sidewalks or else
Fontana, Calif.: “Karen Medina, a student at A.B. Miller High School, was killed on Cypress Avenue in December 2001 when a car driven by a 15-year-old unlicensed driver veered out of control.” So who’s 75 percent to blame for her death? Why, the taxpayers of Fontana, because the city hadn’t built sidewalks on the thoroughfare in question — or so said a jury which awarded her parents $37.5 million. (Lance Pugmire, “Death of Girl May Cost Fontana Millions”, Los Angeles Times, Sept. 22; “Jury Blames City For Teen’s Death On Busy Road”, NBC4.tv, Sept. 22).
Now, around the country, it’s common for towns to refrain from building sidewalks alongside many or most of their roads, whether for aesthetic reasons, to reflect residents’ wishes, or simply because other ways of spending town funds seem more pressing. Fontana, known as a blue-collar community, planned to build sidewalks along Cypress Avenue at some point but was waiting for state grant money to come through. It may now have less wherewithal with which to pursue similar projects in the future. A footnote: although lawyers made much of the theme that the victim when hit was walking home from school, the actual accident occurred in a residential neighborhood which would appear not to have been especially close to the school (“less than a mile”).