In my radio interview last week, I was asked about the Wisconsin Association of Trial Lawyers’ claim that tort reform measures have no effect on medical insurance rates. ATLA’s “fact sheet” on medical malpractice reform makes the same claim. A 2003 HHS compilation of studies on the matter, linked on our old medical page, refutes that proposition. (HHS, “Confronting the New Health Care Crisis”, Mar. 3, 2003 at Tables 6 and 7).
Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category
Prosecuting the innocent, without consequences
Yesterday’s (Sunday’s) New York Post ran my review of Dorothy Rabinowitz’s just-out-in-softcover No Greater Tyrannies, about abuse-hysteria prosecutions. An excerpt: “In 1696, four years after the Salem executions, the Massachusetts colony held a day of contrition and collective soul-searching. Today, the persecutors seldom apologize; instead they tend to rise upward. Scott Harshbarger, D.A. in the Amirault case, went on to become attorney general of his state and now heads Common Cause, in which capacity he lectures the rest of us on ethics and good government.” (Walter Olson, “Salem Is Still With Us”, New York Post, Mar. 21). The New York Times reports that wrongful convictions, even when serious prosecutorial error or misconduct is involved and even when the accused was evidently innocent, seldom result in any career consequences for local prosecutors (Andrea Elliott and Benjamin Weiser, “When Prosecutors Err, Others Pay the Price”, New York Times, Mar. 21). And the Wall Street Journal has reprinted Ms. Rabinowitz’s column about the amazing ordeal gastroenterologist Patrick Griffin went through on charges of sexually abusing a patient, which culminated in his eventual acquittal on retrial — though by that point his medical license had been yanked and his practice was in ruins (“The Doctor’s Story”, Wall Street Journal, May 24, 2000). (via GruntDoc) (see also Jan. 8, Sept. 1)
Authors: sue us, please
“Paradoxically, a lawsuit, especially a flimsy one, can be a boon to a book’s fortunes. And increasingly, some writers and publishers admit to hoping they’ll attract one.” Humorist Al Franken was widely envied by other authors when Fox News filed its much-derided suit against his book title (see Nov. 22), and just this past week a small publisher, Soft Skull Press, got a windfall of coverage when publisher HarperCollins sent a cease and desist order (from which it soon retreated) suggesting that the title of one of its new books, “How to Get Stupid White Men Out of Office” was too close to the title of Michael Moore’s “Stupid White Men”. Of course, things can get sticky fast if the legal complaint really does have merit. (Christopher Dreher, “So sue me… please!”, Boston Globe, Mar. 21) (via Tyler Cowen, Volokh).
Remedy for sending coupons: send more coupons
In the latest from the world of junk fax litigation (see Jul. 19, 2003, and links from there; Dec. 8), the bowling company AMF Bowling Centers has agreed to give out up to $1 million cash and $1.5 million in coupons to settle a class action alleging that it sent out as many as 352,000 unsolicited faxes. In addition, attorneys Lance McMillian and Stephen Camp of McMillian & Camp in Newnan, Ga. “will get a total of $250,000, while the lead plaintiff, James Michael Moore of Satellite Specialists in Jonesboro, will get $15,000.” AMF agreed to pay $500 to class members who actually kept a copy of an offending fax, while those who merely swear in an affidavit that they received one will get a less exhilarating prize, $250 in bowling coupons. Critics of the settlement say AMF is getting off too easily: under the terms of federal law, the company might have been liable for fines of between $176 million and $528 million if the charges were proven (see Oct. 22, 1999 for more on this calculus). Another Georgia attorney who had settled lawsuits with AMF over 141 junk faxes sent to his clients was also critical of the coupon aspect: “Sending similar coupons through junk-faxing is the conduct that got AMF in trouble. This is a settlement that enriches AMF and doesn’t provide a meaningful benefit to the consumer.” (Steven H. Pollak, “Junk Faxes Could Cost Bowling Co. $1 Million”, Fulton County Daily Report, May 2).
Arizona wildlife: when in doubt, take it out
Arizona court decisions have recently eroded the state’s historical immunity from being sued over the actions of wild animals, and wildlife managers have been hit with two big liability payouts: a $2.5 million settlement for a girl mauled by a bear, and a $3 million jury verdict payable to a motorist whose vehicle struck an elk. Tucson attorney Mick Rusing, who defended the state in the bear case, says the cases influenced a recent decision to order mountain lions hunted in Sabino Canyon. “The default position of Game and Fish is now, ‘When in doubt, take it out,’ ” Rusing said. “If the courts and the Legislature are not going to protect these agencies and the people who make the decisions, that’s the way it’s going to be.” Rusing drafted a bill that would have provided immunity to game managers but the bill died “after trial lawyers opposed it and the Game and Fish Commission declined to support it.” (Tom Beal, “Bear, elk lawsuits influence lion hunt”, Arizona Daily Star (Tucson), Mar. 13)
New batch of reader letters
We’ve posted four more entries from our alarmingly backed-up pipeline of reader letters, on our letters page. Among topics this time: the oddly divergent views of Wisconsin’s governor on the protection of lawful activities, with special reference to cheeseburger-selling and helmetless cycling; the recently announced class action settlement in Lamb v. Wells Fargo; complaints that some Texas jury pools are now “tainted” against lawsuits; and U-Haul’s role as bystander in the Ford Explorer litigation frenzy.
Compromise satisfies New York Times
New York Times lawyers upset at a parody web page (dated “February 30” and satirizing the Times’ correction policy) backed off once a bold-faced disclaimer was added. (Daniel Okrent, nytimes.com, Mar. 15 (via Wonkette); “NY Times backs off”, New York Daily News, Mar. 16 (last item)). The disclaimer reads, in part:
The Times now recognizes that this Times Columnist Correction page was, and is, a parody intended to express through satire a dissatisfaction with a policy of The New York Times and was in no way intended to confuse people that it was a legitimate New York Times on the Web page. TND also recognizes The Times lawyers are not known for having a well-developed sense of humor and can be susceptible to “not getting the joke”. Therefore we hereby restate that this is not a legitimate New York Times web page. The Times would never issue corrections of a Times Op-Ed Columnist and any attempt to so construe from this parody of a Times web page will be considered punishable under some such law or another as we see fit.
Cornette v. Caltrans
In May 1992, the Stacy and Rodney Cornette were driving on the Antelope Valley Freeway when they were struck by a car that had blown a tire, and pushed into oncoming traffic, where they were struck by a pick-up truck. A Lancaster jury has decided that California taxpayers should be responsible for $5.6 million in damages, because the agency, Caltrans, designed the highway with a 45-foot median instead of a 45-foot median and a concrete barrier. (Caitlin Liu, “Couple in Fiery Crash Win $6-Million Verdict”, Los Angeles Times, Mar. 13; Heather Lake, “Couple win $5.6 million award in crash”, Antelope Valley Press, Mar. 14). However, it’s the story of the interplay between the California courts and legislature which is the interesting part of this.
The un-Brockovich
Little-known Beverly Hills reporter Norma Zager may be making herself the number one nemesis of glamourpuss toxic-tort-chaser Erin Brockovich-Ellis. Zager, who is with the Beverly Hills Courier, has tenaciously dug into the facts surrounding Brockovich’s and employer Edward Masry’s wild charges about supposed contamination at Beverly Hills High School (see Jan. 3 and links from there, and our Oct. 2000 treatment). (Eric Umansky, “Muckraker 90210: A Most Unlikely Reporter Nails Erin Brockovich”, Columbia Journalism Review — now there’s a magazine we haven’t often had a chance to quote favorably–, Mar./Apr.).
On Pa. court sleaze, a kind of hush
Profile of a maverick attorney who after decades of fighting machine corruption and courthouse politics in Pennsylvania is now working for malpractice reform in the state: “[Bob] Surrick is upset about the silencing of the print media because of the fear of libel suits. He said that during the 18 years that Gene Roberts was the Philadelphia Inquirer’s executive editor, the newspaper won 17 Pulitzers, which was unheard of for a newspaper. But during the 1980s (while Roberts was still editor) Surrick said that the judges and justices started the business of suing their critics, particularly the print media critics, for libel, effectively silencing the Inquirer; after Roberts left, the newspaper no longer did investigative reporting on the judiciary. ‘If the media — the guardian of the truth about what is going on in government — does not tell you, who is going to tell you?’ Surrick asks.” (Eileen Laskas, “Whatever Happened to Bob Surrick?”, CountyPressOnline (Phila. suburbs), Jan. 28) (via Donna Rovito’s Liability Update Information Network). For more on the kinds of legal trouble you can get into by criticizing Pennsylvania judges, see Oct. 24-25, 2001.