Posts Tagged ‘Atlanta’

First things first

Not long after some 1,000 firefighters sat down for eight hours of training, the whispering began: “What are we doing here?”

As New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin pleaded on national television for firefighters – his own are exhausted after working around the clock for a week – a battalion of highly trained men and women sat idle Sunday in a muggy Sheraton Hotel conference room in Atlanta. . . .

The firefighters, several of whom are from Utah, were told to bring backpacks, sleeping bags, first-aid kits and Meals Ready to Eat. They were told to prepare for “austere conditions.” Many of them came with awkward fire gear and expected to wade in floodwaters, sift through rubble and save lives.

“They’ve got people here who are search-and-rescue certified, paramedics, haz-mat certified,” said a Texas firefighter. “We’re sitting in here having a sexual-harassment class while there are still [victims] in Louisiana who haven’t been contacted yet.”

How much fear of litigation do you need to let a city burn to ensure no one accuses you of failing to protect against sexual harassment? We might be hearing more stories like this, except FEMA, again with its priorities straight, has told firefighters not to talk to reporters. (Lisa Rosetta, “Frustrated: Fire crews to hand out fliers for FEMA”, Salt Lake Tribune, Sep. 6 (via Instapundit)).

Mobile Register on silicosis scandal

The gigantic silicosis/asbestos screening scandal recently laid bare in a Texas courtroom (see Ted’s and my extensive coverage at Point of Law, also this site May 19, 2005 and — we were on to this early — Sept. 13 and Nov. 12, 2003) originated with the sworn testimony of a Mobile, Ala. radiologist last October; George Martindale’s deposition set in motion a chain of events that led federal judge Janis Graham Jack to issue a scathing 249-page court order Jun. 30 charging that 10,000 silicosis cases before her courtroom had been “manufactured for money”. Now reporter Eddie Curran of the Mobile Register, whose work we’ve saluted before, is out with an investigative piece that makes compelling reading. (Eddie Curran, “Judge torches silicosis testing”, Mobile Register, Jul. 31).

Roger Parloff also tackles the scandal at length and exceptionally well in Fortune, as usual behind a subscriber-only screen (“Diagnosing for Dollars”, Jun. 13). An opinion piece by Luke Boggs in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (“Frivolous claims spur backlash”, Jun. 14) comments: “While sleazy lawyers have traditionally chased ambulances, attorneys in the silica case didn’t trail anyone to a medical facility. Instead, they set up their own, putting an X-ray machine and a doctor in a trailer in a restaurant parking lot. Seriously. Not only that, but the X-ray machine was owned by a real estate broker, the doctor wasn’t a radiologist, and no one had a license to take X-rays.” On the reverberations that continue to echo from the scandal in the mass-tort business nationwide, see Peter Geier, “Silica Case Seen as Breakthrough”, National Law Journal, Aug. 4, and “Breathing Down on California: Texans charge into state with sometimes shady silicosis suits”, The Recorder, Jun. 3, reprinted at Texans for Lawsuit Reform site.

Class action fees slashed — or not

Last month Vice Chancellor Leo E. Strine Jr. of Delaware’s Chancery Court slashed by three-quarters a $4.95 million fee request by class action lawyers who intervened on behalf of shareholders in a dispute involving Cox Enterprises, the media company; he blasted some of the lawyers’ filings as “dashed off complaints” and “hastily drafted throwaways” and questioned whether they had done much to influence the final disposition of the transaction. In Atlanta, on the other hand, “Fulton Superior Court Judge Constance C. Russell awarded all of the requested $1.25 million in fees to Atlanta lawyers Corey D. Holzer and Michael I. Fistel Jr. of Holzer & Holzer; Steven J. Estep of Cohen, Cooper, Estep & Mudder; and other lawyers” in parallel class action litigation arising from the same dispute. “A key difference between the two cases was that a group of shareholders in the Delaware case filed official objections to the fee requests, while in Atlanta, the lawyer for those shareholders informally submitted information from the Delaware case to argue that the lawyers in the Fulton case provided little, if any, benefit to the shareholders they represented.” The objecting lawyer in both the Delaware and the Georgia proceedings was Elliott J. Weiss, a professor at the University of Arizona’s James E. Rogers College of Law. Apparently feeling that Weiss’s less-than-official submission could be brushed aside, Judge Russell issued an order approving the fees without elaboration. (Steven H. Pollak, “Ga. Lawyers in Cox Case Escape Fee-Slashing Endured by Delaware Counterparts”, Fulton County Daily Report, Jul. 18). More: Francis Pileggi (Jun. 24) has posted a copy of the Delaware decision (PDF) and Larry Ribstein has commented Jul. 20 (referring to “Chancellor Strine’s classic-to-be opinion”) and again Jul. 29 (“The vice chancellor paints a picture of truly parasitic lawyers inserting themselves into a corporate transaction and demanding to be paid big bucks to go away.”)

“Gun Liability Control”

The Wall Street Journal editorial page celebrates the likelihood that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act will pass, which would end the gun-control-through-litigation movement.

State legislatures have been rolling back firearm laws because the restrictions were both ineffectual and unpopular. Gun-controllers have responded by avoiding legislatures and going to court, teaming with trial lawyers and big city mayors to file lawsuits blaming gun makers for murder. Companies have been hit with at least 25 major lawsuits, from the likes of Boston, Atlanta, St. Louis, Chicago and Cleveland. A couple of the larger suits (New York and Washington, D.C.) are sitting in front of highly creative judges and could drag on for years.

Which seems to be part of the point. The plaintiffs have asked judges to impose the sort of “remedies” that Congress has refused to impose, such as trigger locks or tougher restrictions on gun sales. Some mayors no doubt also hope for a big payday. But short of that, the gun-control lobby’s goal seems to be keep the suits going long enough to drain profit from the low-margin gun industry.

(Wall Street Journal, Jul. 27 ($)). Democratic Senator John D. Rockefeller IV yesterday became the sixtieth co-sponsor. Still, the Journal may be celebrating prematurely. Last term, the legislation was scuttled by the attachment of clever poison-pill amendments that caused the most fervent guns-rights advocates to withdraw support for the bill, so the fact that the current bill has supermajority support surprisingly doesn’t mean that it’s out of the woods yet. For more, see our ongoing coverage.

RFK Jr. vs. thimerosal

One of America’s least credible public figures, celebrity environmentalist Robert F. Kennedy Jr., wades into the mercury in vaccines/autism controversy (Dec. 29, 2003, earlier posts) with a “special investigation” for Salon and Rolling Stone rehearsing the contentions of anti-thimerosal activists (“Deadly Immunity”, Jun. 16). Orac at Respectful Insolence, who’s covered the controversy extensively, hits back hard here, here and here. Reactions from Salon’s readers are here, and the online magazine has already been obliged to post several corrections of Kennedy’s errors, including the following remarkably embarrassing one:

The article also misstated the level of ethylmercury received by infants injected with all their shots by the age of six months. It was 187 micrograms — an amount 40 percent, not 187 times, greater than the EPA’s limit for daily exposure to methylmercury.

More: Skeptico (Jun. 20) challenges RFK Jr.’s account of a supposedly hush-hush meeting of vaccine scientists held outside Atlanta (via Adler, the Corner).

New bloggers at Point of Law

Atlanta attorney Jonathan B. Wilson, author of the newly released book Out of Balance: Prescriptions for Reforming America’s Litigation System, has now begun blogging at our sister site Point of Law and also has his own weblog site which is eminently worth checking out. And next week two guest bloggers — both already well established on their own blogs — are scheduled to begin guestblogging stints there as well. Check it out!

Welcome Small Business Advocate listeners

I was a guest on Jim Blasingame’s national radio program “The Small Business Advocate” yesterday, discussing class actions and other topics. You can listen to the show live on the web; one way to find the link is from his archive of law-related shows. Jim Blasingame was kind enough to call The Rule of Lawyers “one of my favorite books”; you can find a copy on Amazon (hardcover or paperback). For more information on how employment lawsuits have watered down strength prerequisites for law enforcement jobs (such as those guarding courthouses in Atlanta and other places), check this Point of Law post.

Atlanta courthouse shootings

Over on Point of Law, I have a short piece on the small contribution employment law developments made to Brian Nichols’s escape and resulting murder of three or four people. Michelle Malkin’s readers debate the issue. Certainly, there were other contibuting farcical errors, including a weak prosecution that resulted in a mistrial the first time Nichols’s rape count was tried, the shocking underreaction to Nichols trying to smuggle shanks into the courtroom, nobody monitoring the cameras that showed Nichols overpowering Cynthia Hill, and police overlooking for thirteen hours that a Honda thought to be an escape vehicle was still in the garage where it had supposedly been carjacked.

Rest assured, though, that the Fulton County judicial system appears to have at least as many snafus as its security system:

Read On…

“What the Doctor Saw”

“The court system through the eyes of a surgeon sued for malpractice/The jury needed just 15 minutes to end the case, but first orthopedist Stephen M. McCollam had to live under its cloud for four years.” Outstandingly reported account of a surgeon’s professional liability trial from the standpoint of the defendant and his family as well as the lawyers on both sides. Long, detailed, and in PDF format, but must reading (S. Richard Gard, Jr., “What the Doctor Saw”, Fulton County Daily Report (Atlanta), Jan. 31). Plus: letters, some very angry, from lawyers and other readers of the Daily Report (Feb. 7); Feb. 7 follow-up from Gard, who’s editor and publisher of the Daily Report as well as the author of the piece (via SymTym).

Holiday-dinner-table obesity roundup

The Centers for Disease Control admitted last week that a much-touted estimate of enormous mortality rates resulting from increasing obesity in America was wrong and arose from incorrect methodology; it promises a revised and lower estimate (Gina Kolata, “Data on Deaths From Obesity Is Inflated, U.S. Agency Says”, New York Times, Nov. 24; Radley Balko, Nov. 24; Jacob Sullum, Reason “Hit and Run”, Nov. 24; Jim Copland, PointOfLaw, Nov. 24 and Nov. 30). The National Institutes of Health’s body mass index is also falling into disrepute for overrating the incidence of obesity (Gina Kolata, “Tell the Truth: Does This Index Make Me Look Fat?”, New York Times, Nov. 28)(see Apr. 29-30, 2002).

As for lawsuits, the scary Public Health Advocacy Institute, where trial lawyers meet dietitians, held its second annual conference in September, with opening remarks by Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) (Marguerite Higgins, “Anti-obesity group mulls swell in suits”, Washington Times, Sept. 19; “Lawyers see obese U.S. ripe for fat lawsuits”, Sept. 20; Center for Consumer Freedom, “Looking For Lawsuits In All The Wrong Places”, Sept. 24). The food-industry-defense Center for Consumer Freedom (“Don’t Sue the Hand That Feeds You”) has prepared a “Thanksgiving Guest Liability and Indemnification Agreement” (PDF) (via LawfulGal, Nov. 25) and has also (Sept. 27) compiled a list of the “Ten Dumbest Food Cop Ideas” of the year. These include law prof John Banzhaf’s proposals for suing parents of obese children and doctors who fail to warn their obese patients against overeating; Texas officials’ edict against schoolkids’ sharing of snacks; and a proposal by the New Zealand health minister to apply age restrictions, in the manner of carding for alcohol and tobacco purchases, to keep kids from buying hamburgers, pie and candy. A Deloitte consumer opinion survey (“The Weight Debate”, last updated Jul. 14) finds the public overwhelmingly opposed to lawsuits against restaurants.

Read On…