Posts Tagged ‘attorneys general’

Sovereign immunity, cont’d

Following up on my WSJ piece about the problems that arose for the state of Washington when it came to be exposed to lawsuits alleging that it had failed to prevent some types of crime (see Dec. 24), Mike Tardif of the Washington attorney general’s office (whose co-authored law review article I discuss in the piece) writes in as follows:

I read and enjoyed your article. You have accurately depicted the overall nature of the liability problem caused by creating liability for “governmental” functions and you have accurately summarized the gist of our law review article.

I have one comment on your point concerning why governments do not adjust their behaviors in response to liabilities for broad governmental functions. The primary reason is that what governments do in these areas is determined by the political process, i.e., the basic program, staffing levels, and funding are set by statute and budget. There is little or no ability at the administrative level to change these things in response to jury decisions in liability suits. Ironically, in a suit such as our Joyce case (the $23 million verdict), the Dept. of Corrections has no ability to raise taxes to create the funding for the parole officer positions needed to reach the level of supervision dictated by the broad liability imposed by the Court, but DOC does have the legal responsibility to put money into the risk fund to pay its settlements and judgments, thereby reducing the funds available to hire the parole officers needed to mitigate the risk.

I should also have mentioned that when my piece quoted the interesting comments of Prof. Greg Sisk of St. Thomas University School of Law on sovereign immunity as a species of separation of powers, I was actually quoting from a blog, namely the Catholic group lawblog Mirror of Justice (Oct. 19).

George Will on tobacco and the states

Reacting to the recent Philip Morris decision (PoL Dec. 15, etc.), the columnist is in righteous form:

The Illinois Supreme Court’s ruling stimulated the market for “tobacco-revenue munis.” Those are municipal bonds backed by tobacco revenue streams resulting from a real fraud — the Master Settlement Agreement. In 1998, 46 states conspired to seize $246 billion from companies that sell products made from a commodity — tobacco — the cultivation of which was then subsidized by the federal government….

The MSA is a deal struck between the state attorneys general and trial lawyers. For the latter, it was a financial windfall, netting about $13 billion in fees that sometimes amounted to tens of thousands of dollars per hour of work. For the former, it was a political windfall, enabling their states to finance this and that with billions paid by smokers, who are disproportionately low-income people….

The states’ ability to continue treating the tobacco industry as a “budgetary Alaska” — the last frontier for exploitation — depends on brisk sales of cigarettes far into the future. So all 50 states, which in 2004 reaped $12.3 billion in cigarette taxes, have an incentive to carefully calibrate these taxes so as to maximize revenue. They want high taxes, but not high enough to cause large numbers of smokers to quit the habit that is so lucrative to states.

(“The States’ Tobacco Addiction”, syndicated/Washington Post, Jan. 1)(more on tobacco litigation).

NYC transit strike

Which New York elected official has the legal authority and responsibility to take action against the union’s lawbreaking, but almost certainly won’t? Ted has the answer. (Hint: initials are E.S.)

P.S. Thanks to our commenter for pointing out that our prediction above wasn’t accurate as worded, since reports are that Attorney General Spitzer is willing to go to court to enforce the injunction. Ted’s point, which I should have been more careful in conveying, is that it’s doubtful Spitzer will proceed to “seek the full measure of damages on behalf of New York citizenry, and criminal penalties for the criminal contempt of the union leadership”.

More (Dec. 21): The judge’s $1 million/day contempt fine against the union may sound high, but needs to be set against economic damage to the city and its residents amounting to hundreds of millions a day. As Ted points out in comments, it amounts to $30/day per union member; MTA bus drivers make $60,000 a year. In addition, unions frequently succeed in negotiating an amnesty for fines as part of an eventual strike settlement; Steve Malanga of the Manhattan Institute notes that in the TWU’s illegal eleven-day walkout in 1980, “when a judge imposed fines on workers, they simply upped their demands to cover the costs, winning 18% wage increases over two years.” (“What Would Reagan Do?”, WSJ (sub), Dec. 21; “Make the TWU Pay For the Harm It’s Done”, (editorial), New York Post, Dec. 21 (reg); “The transit strike” (editorial), New York Sun, Dec. 20; John P. Avlon, “Hostage for the Holidays”, New York Sun, Dec. 16).

The wages of unconstitutionality

A local columnist reminisces:

Salt Lake City attorney Brian Barnard used to sift through state and local statutes passed decades earlier and since declared unconstitutional, then find a plaintiff to fight them in court.

The laws were normally declared unconstitutional through agreement with government lawyers and the court. Barnard then would be paid attorney fees by the state.

But former Attorney General David Wilkinson disliked the idea of paying Barnard attorney fees, so for a time during his 1980s tenure, he would fight the claim of unconstitutionality. That would require Barnard to file more briefs, adding hours to his work and eventually giving him a fatter paycheck when the attorney’s fees came due.

One time, however, Wilkinson was so late in approving Barnard’s attorney fees that the civil rights attorney persuaded a judge to garnishee Wilkinson’s state salary to satisfy the payment. Wilkinson approved the payment right away.

(Paul Rolly, “Attorney steps on some toes”, Salt Lake Tribune, Dec. 9) (via State of the Beehive).

Fieger blackmail allegations

Howard Bashman has full coverage, including links to transcripts, of Fieger’s alleged attempt to block an investigation into Fieger’s alleged campaign finance violations by revealing details of the attorney general’s extramarital affair (Nov. 10). Fieger allegedly spent $400,000 on a Michigan Supreme Court race without disclosing his spending. “Sandler, in statements to sheriff’s investigators, says Fieger warned he would pat down Sandler so he did not wear a listening device.”

“Cox: Fieger tried to blackmail me about affair”

Further fireworks from the frequently fascinating Fieger files:

Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox accused a potential 2006 political opponent, high profile Oakland County lawyer Geoffrey Fieger, of blackmail Wednesday, claiming that Fieger threatened to reveal his extramarital affair if Cox did not drop an investigation into the lawyer’s alleged campaign finance violations.

(Dawson Bell and L.L. Brasier, Detroit Free Press, Nov. 9). For more on Fieger, whose activities have long been a mainstay of this site, see Mar. 13, Oct. 24, and many others.

More on the story: David Shepardson and Mike Martindale, “Sex scandal”, Detroit News, Nov. 10 (check sidebar for over-the-top statement by Fieger); L.L. Brasier and Patricia Montemurri, “Figure in Fieger-Cox sex scandal has criminal past”, Detroit Free Press, Nov. 10); Dawson Bell and L.L. Brasier, “Cox: Fieger made threat over affair”, Detroit Free Press, Nov. 10 (“one of the most bizarre events in recent Michigan political history”):

Fieger has a long history of stirring up trouble, both for himself and others, and sometimes on a personal level.

In 1998, when he was the Democratic nominee for governor, he suggested that his opponent — then-Gov. John Engler — was not the father of triplet daughters born to his wife, Michelle, in 1994.

Seriously Bad Elf beer

The Ridgeway Brewery in England brews a bitter winter ale which it calls Seriously Bad Elf, complete with a drawing of a gnomic figure on the label. Now officials in Connecticut, including Attorney General and bete-noire-of-this-site Richard Blumenthal, have banned imports of the ale on the grounds that an elf drawing might entice minors to drink the beer. (“‘Seriously Bad Elf’ Beer Banned In CT”, CBS4Boston, Oct. 28; “Connecticut looks to ban British beer with elf label”, AP/USA Today, Oct. 29).

Geoffrey Fieger update

You will recall that Geoffrey Fieger’s modus operandi is to engage in outrageous behavior to get judges thrown off of cases and otherwise accuse judges who rule against him or his clients of misconduct (Nov. 20; Mar. 24). Now, in the aftermath of Hollins v. Jordan (Nov. 20 and links therein), Fieger is attacking an Ohio probate court judge who is daring to try to protect the settlement of the brain-damaged and legally incompetent plaintiff from Fieger’s machinations.

“This is all about intimidation,” [Judge] Corrigan said. He accused the plaintiffs’ out-of-town lawyers of “forum-shopping” to take the case away from him and give it to a Michigan judge more acquiescent to their wishes.

(James F. McCarty, “$30 million verdict spawns new legal battle”, Cleveland Plain-Dealer, Oct. 9). This dispute is over a $1.5 million pretrial settlement with another defendant; the $30 million verdict is also on appeal.

Back in Michigan, Fieger is offering to spend millions of dollars of his own money to run for Michigan Attorney General on the Democratic ticket. (Steven Harmon, “Fieger ready to pour own cash into attorney general fight”, Grand Rapids Press, Oct. 21). Fortunately for the Democratic Party, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of support for the idea. (Kathleen Gray, “Fieger considers running for state attorney general”, Detroit Free Press, Oct. 12). John Engler easily beat Fieger, 62 percent to 38 percent, when Fieger ran for governor in 1998.

The targeting of the incumbent attorney general, Mike Cox, may be related to “an ongoing criminal investigation of a complaint from Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land about alleged filing irregularities on $400,000 of Fieger-financed spending opposing the successful 2004 re-election of Republican Michigan Supreme Court Justice Stephen Markman.” (George Weeks, “Fieger isn’t faking bid for attorney general”, Detroit News, Oct. 13). Fieger has demonstrated his misunderstanding of principles of federal jurisdiction with a federal lawsuit against Cox and Land in an attempt to squelch the campaign finance investigation. (AP, Oct. 13).

At DRI in Chicago Thursday

The Defense Research Institute has been kind enough to invite me to speak on two panels at its annual meeting in Chicago on Thursday. The first panel will touch on topics including litigation-curbing reforms (a topic on which DRI and I have been known to come down on opposite sides), while the second will discuss the changing role of state attorneys general. I know many DRI members read this site: if you see me at the conference, feel free to come up and say hello.

Joys of bounty-hunting: internet sales tax

In Chicago, veteran class-action attorney Stephen Diamond has been profitably suing retailers that don’t collect state and local sales taxes from online customers:

Using a state whistle-blower law, Mr. Diamond since 2002 has filed about 95 suits in Cook County court here against retailers that failed to charge him taxes on Internet sales, alleging that they broke the law. In cases where the state of Illinois joins the suits and prevails, he is entitled to up to 25% of the financial damages, with the rest going to state coffers….

Because of settlement agreements between the retailers and the attorney general’s office, the state’s judges have agreed to keep the names of most of the retailers and the settlement amounts confidential.

The retailers, like their mail-order-catalogue counterparts, have in the past often taken the position that the responsibility for making sure sales tax is paid rests with the customer; disputes sometimes arise about whether a particular retailer has sufficient operations within a state to count as present within it for tax-collection purposes.

Mr. Diamond’s targets have included such firms as Wal-Mart, Office Depot and KB Toys. He has taken an interest in expanding his practice beyond Illinois to the three other states with laws allowing private citizens to enrich themselves this way, but his efforts in those cases have been less successful. After he filed about 30 tax suits in Tennessee, lawmakers there repealed their statute authorizing such suits, and passed the word to nearby Virginia which also repealed its similar law. That leaves Nevada, where he has filed 10 suits which the state attorney general has moved to dismiss. In Illinois, he would seem in little danger of being shut down any time soon: the office of state Attorney General Lisa Madigan, a key trial lawyer ally, has been willing to cooperate with his activities though disputing his right to as high a share of the booty as he would like. (Robert Guy Matthews, “Online Retailer Skips Sales Tax? You Might Sue”, Wall Street Journal, Oct. 14)(online subscribers only).