Courtesy Matt Conigliaro (Jul. 18): swings and other fun elements are disappearing fast from South Florida playgrounds under lawyering pressure. “To say ‘no running’ on the playground seems crazy,” says Broward County School Board member Robin Bartleman, whose own 6-year-old daughter is disappointed in the playground at Everglades Elementary in Weston. “But your feelings change when you’re in a closed-door meeting with lawyers.” “Play is one of children’s chief vehicles for development,” said University of Texas emeritus professor Joe Frost, who runs the Play and Playgrounds Research Project there. “Right now it looks like we’re developing a nation of wimps.” (Chris Kahn, “In the pursuit of safety, teeter-totters and swings are disappearing from playgrounds”, South Florida Sun-Sentinel, Jul. 18). See Sept. 8, Mar. 5, etc. More: Liz Lightfoot, “Schools ‘wrap children in cotton wool'”, Daily Telegraph (U.K.), May 3.
Search Results for ‘playground’
Disabled-friendly playground damages claim
“Twin Meadows, designed to be the first playground in [Stamford, CT] where disabled children can play safely, opened in October amid fanfare.” But a few weeks later, two-year-old Konrad Mader collided with a green railing while running towards a treehouse. This is, apparently, the city’s fault for not picking a different color for the railing in the playground. “In her claim, Mader does not specify the amount she is seeking from the city on her son’s behalf, only saying she wants compensation for his medical bills, pain and suffering and a ‘lost wage amount due to his inability to audition or take modeling or commercial jobs while his head heals.'” (Donna Porstner, “Child model, actor seeks compensation after playground mishap”, Stamford Advocate, Dec. 26) (via Bashman).
Update: the corporation counsel for Stamford tells the New York Times “It seems like it’s a fairly obvious guardrail. It’s not like it’s up against bushes.” (Avi Salzman, “Playground Injury Harmed Son’s Career, Mother Says”, Dec. 27) (also via Bashman).
Further update: the mother has publicly backed down in response to public outrage; it remains unclear whether she was bluffing in the first place. (Donna Porstner, “Mother of bruised toddler explains complaint”, Stamford Advocate, Dec. 30). A playground supporter comments on the story. (“Mom at home” weblog, Dec. 26 and Dec. 28).
Schumer backtracks on SCOTUS diatribe, but not far enough
On Wednesday, at a rally on the Supreme Court steps, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) cut loose with a truly amazing diatribe against Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, declaring that the two would “pay the price” and “won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” Schumer’s menacing if vague comments drew prompt disapproval from a broad range of legal figures, such as the heads of the American Bar Association and New York City Bar Association as well as Democratic SCOTUS shortlister Neal Katyal and Harvard’s Larry Tribe. Chief Justice John Roberts weighed in with a rare public rebuke: “threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous.”
Schumer proceeded to dig in and even blast Roberts personally for the criticism. By Thursday, he was ready to concede grudgingly that he “should not have used the words I used. They didn’t come out the way I intended to,” while still staying on the offensive in every other respect and accusing his adversaries of “manufacturing” the uproar.
I’ve got a new post at Ricochet reviewing the controversy, including its much-echoed “what about…?” dimension:
Defenders of Schumer assailed the chief justice for not having weighed on some other inappropriate Trump sallies, including his ill-grounded speculation recently (never filed as an actual motion) that Justices Ruth Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor should recuse themselves from Trump matters, and his aspersions on the judge in the Roger Stone case. Those are part of a frequent and blatant Trump habit of trash-talking judges, both as a candidate (calling the judge in the Trump University case “Mexican” and “a hater”) and as President (“so-called judge” among numerous others). Some — I’m one — would say that this is among Trump’s very worst and most damaging patterns of behavior.
But as cooler heads noted, including Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post, the chief justice is not a playground proctor who can step in to write up every demerit; he needs to save his efforts for the instances that are most dangerous, as he in fact has done.
The wider picture, it might be noted, is one in which nasty swipes at judges have been routinized for years, from a range of public figures and also from former President Barack Obama, both in his 2010 State of the Union speech and also repeatedly during the court review of ObamaCare. Still, none of these have gone as far to suggest personal threat as did Schumer — not even the extraordinarily inappropriate amicus brief filed by Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse and four other Senate Democrats last August, assailing the Court’s legitimacy and warning that “restructuring” at the hands of political branches lies ahead if it does not mend its ways.
I conclude that Schumer needs to go back and apologize, seriously this time. And it’s time for all who’ve fallen short of defending judicial independence — Republicans and Democrats alike — to do so. [cross-posted from Cato at Liberty]
San Francisco: forget that NRA contractor blacklist
A memo last week from San Francisco Mayor London Breed made clear that “the City’s contracting processes and policies have not changed and will not change as a result of the Resolution” by the Board of Supervisors branding the National Rifle Association a domestic terrorist group. [Joshua Koehn, San Francisco Chronicle] The resolution had proclaimed that the city should take all reasonable steps to identify and limit business and financial links between its vendors and contractors and the membership organization, but Breed pointed out that the city enacts changes to its law only by ordinance, not by resolution, which means the swaggering language had no effect off the playground. It had been widely predicted that courts would strike down a move by the city to coerce contractors in this way. Earlier here and here.
Liability roundup
- Big win for scientific rigor in the courts as New Jersey joins 40 other states in adopting Daubert standards for expert testimony, in In re Accutane Litigation [Washington Legal Foundation: Evan Tager and Surya Kundu, Joe Hollingsworth and Robert Johnston] With the long domination of the Florida Supreme Court by its liberal bloc soon to end, is it too much to hope that Florida joins the national trend too? [Evan Tager and Matthew Waring, WLF]
- California lawyers sue electric scooter companies and manufacturers after users run into pedestrians on street, park improperly in handicapped spaces, and leave them in places where they can be tripped over [Cyrus Farivar, ArsTechnica]
- Defendants obtain fees and costs in suit against siren maker over firefighter hearing loss [Stephen McConnell, Drug and Device Law]
- Some safety advocates’ flip-flops on autonomous vehicle legislation in Congress might relate to trial lawyers’ agenda of the moment [Marc Scribner, CEI, more]
- “Labaton Sucharow agrees to return $4.8M in attorney fees after attorney finder fee is revealed” [ABA Journal, earlier on State Street/Arkansas Teacher Retirement System case here, etc.]
- MGM, Fox settle class action claiming that box set of “all” James Bond films lacked two made outside the franchise [Eriq Gardner/Hollywood Reporter, earlier]
Liability roundup
- NFL alleges its billion-dollar concussion settlement fund has drawn hundreds of millions in fraudulent claims [Nicholas Malfitano, Penn Record; Andrew Beaton, WSJ]
- After the mass shootings: “We’ve all gotten a thousand phone calls from lawyers.” [Jack Healy, New York Times]
- Retrial in Sheldon Silver corruption case [Bill Sanderson/New York Daily News, more, yet more (guilty on all counts)] “Silver’s disgrace has had no discernible effect on the way Albany conducts the public’s business. And no one should have expected it to, given the record.” [Bob McManus, City Journal] City’s asbestos docket, on which Silver thrived, is still a plaintiff’s playground [Daniel Fisher, more]
- One reason for Illinois’s reputation as a lawsuit hot spot is its willingness to hear disputes from elsewhere [Dan McCaleb, Illinois News Network]
- “Split Pennsylvania court refuses to void $500K award to man burned during ride in crowded limo” [Matt Miller, PennLive]
- Judge tosses lawsuit over McDonald’s Extra Value Meals [Patricia Manson, Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, earlier] “NYC Man Sues Halo Top For Not Being Regular Ice Cream” [Jen Carlson, Gothamist]
The man who exposed the shoddy forensics of Shaken Baby Syndrome — and got prosecuted
John Plunkett, who just died at age 70, was a Minnesota medical examiner who grew skeptical of the forensic theory behind Shaken Baby Syndrome.
He started investigating cases in which children had died in a manner similar to the way accused caregivers had described the deaths of the children they were watching — by short-distance falls. What he found alarmed him. In 2001, Plunkett published a study detailing how he had found symptoms similar to those in the SBS diagnosis in children who had fallen off playground equipment. It was a landmark study. If a short-distance fall could produce symptoms similar to those in SBS cases, the SBS diagnosis that said symptoms could only come from shaking was wrong. By that point, hundreds of people had been convicted based on SBS testimony from medical experts. Some of them were undoubtedly guilty. But if Plunkett was right, some of them almost certainly weren’t.
After he gave expert testimony that led to an acquittal in Oregon and thus became “a threat to SBS cases all over the country,” the county district attorney indicted Plunkett over supposed inconsistencies in his testimony. Those proceedings eventuated in the dropping of some charges and Plunkett’s acquittal on the rest; in the mean time, however, they chilled the willingness of defense attorneys elsewhere to rely on his testimony. [Radley Balko]
Crime and punishment roundup
- Fiasco of Cliven Bundy prosecution points up that even those who break the law are entitled to a fair trial. “In the Bundy case, Judge Navarro slammed the FBI for withholding key evidence. Unfortunately, this seems to be standard procedure for the FBI.” [James Bovard, USA Today; Mark Joseph Stern, Slate; earlier]
- Don’t undermine structural protection Double Jeopardy Clause provides against prosecutorial overreach [Jay Schweikert on Cato amicus brief in Currier v. Virginia] Case gives SCOTUS chance to reconsider “dual sovereignty” exception to Double Jeopardy Clause [Ilya Shapiro on Cato certiorari brief in Gamble v. U.S.]
- “The room he was in happened to fall within 572 feet of a park and 872 feet of a school,” within the 1000 feet set by Tennessee law, result misery [C.J. Ciaramella and Lauren Krisai, Reason (“Drug-free school zone laws are rarely if ever used to prosecute sales of drugs to minors. Such cases are largely a figment of our popular imagination.”)]
- Missed last spring: this challenge to the “Standard Story” of mass incarceration [Adam Gopnik on John Pfaff’s “Locked In”]
- Ignorance of the law is no excuse. But with law having proliferated beyond anyone’s grasp, perhaps it should be? [Stephen Carter, Bloomberg, earlier]
- Another study finds decriminalizing prostitution reduces sexual abuse and rape [Alex Tabarrok]
Best of Overlawyered — April 2017
- “Miami may target Airbnb hosts who spoke at City Hall”;
- USA Today investigates ADA drive-by lawsuits;
- Third Circuit: neighbors who criticized condo residents over emotional support dogs must face civil rights suit;
- “It’s like open carry, but for Coppertone” in Spokane schools;
- Surveillance videos of flash-mob robbery of Oakland BART station will not be made public because people committing crimes appear to be minors;
- “Oregon man fined $500 for calling himself engineer in email to state” (and he eventually won)
- Judge in Ireland rules on playground fall: an old-fashioned accident, no cash to be had.
Cato Constitution Day videos
There goes the rest of your weekend: the videos of Cato’s Constitution Day conference are now online.
I moderated the third panel, on “Property, Religious and Secular,” with Roger Pilon, Vice President for Legal Affairs at Cato; Prof. Rick Garnett, Notre Dame Law School; and Goodwin Procter LLP partner Thomas Hefferon, discussing Murr v. Wisconsin (land and regulatory takings), Trinity Lutheran (state aid to otherwise qualifying church playground, and Miami versus Wells Fargo and Bank America (scope of damages in fair housing mortgage suit).
NYU law professor Philip Hamburger delivered the annual Simon Lecture on “The Administrative Threat To Civil Liberties.”
Full set of videos, including three other panels, here.