Class action impresario Bill Lerach’s old Lerach Coughlin firm, now renamed Coughlin Stoia, continues to prosper mightily despite the imprisonment of its former principal, but federal judge James Rosenbaum in Minnesota has now knocked $45 million off a $110 million fee request in a settlement of a class action against UnitedHealth, saying the firm would probably not have been selected as lead counsel had Lerach “timely and fully” disclosed to the court his status as a target of federal investigation. The lead plaintiff in the case was CALPERS, the California public employee pension fund that has long enjoyed cozy relations with politicians, unions and prominent class-actioneers. [Dan Levine, The Recorder/Law.com]
Posts Tagged ‘California’
Noneconomic damages and pets
Late [July 31], the California Court of Appeal issued its decision in the case of McMahon v. Craig, holding unequivocally that California law does not permit an animal owner to recover damages for his or her emotional distress at the injury or death of an animal caused by negligence, and that there can be no recovery of damages for loss of the companionship of a non-human companion.
The report is first-hand, for it was blogger Wallace who represented the winning side in the case. Congratulations are in order.
Sexual harassment lawsuits of the future: Comic-Con edition
Electronic Arts surely has better lawyers than the ones who signed off on this contest (h/t cirocco), which merely asks for a standard grip-and-grin photo, but can be read to require photos of “acts of lust” upon booth models. And that’s not even taking account of the Alfred Ravas of the world, since Comic-Con is in San Diego, and thus subject to the Unruh Act…
Sacramento’s “Squeeze Inn” hit with ADA suit
The popular eatery, which has been spotlighted by the Food Network show “Diners, Drive-ins and Dives”, is famous for being cramped, as its name implies. So here comes the inevitable wheelchair-access suit by a plaintiff represented by serial Northern California ADA-suit filer Jason Singleton. [California Civil Justice, Popehat; restaurant site] More on Singleton’s activities: North Coast Journal cover story, 2001, and May 2008 coverage. Update: restaurant now planning to move.
Foreclosure defense: “The Middle Class Advocate”
Here’s his public presentation. Here’s another side of the story.
“Man Burned at Burning Man Assumed Risk of Injury”
“Get too close to the Burning Man fire and you assume the “obvious and inherent” risk of being burned, a California appeals court has ruled in dismissing a personal injury lawsuit against the operators of the iconic countercultural arts festival.” [OnPoint News, ruling in PDF, Bob Egelko/San Francisco Chronicle, Shaun Martin/California Appellate Report (sees ruling as expanding scope of existing California assumption-of-risk defense), Michael Krauss/Point of Law (hails ruling), Lowering the Bar]
The exploits of Alfred Rava, cont’d
Bruce Nye at Cal Biz Lit has more on the California lawyer and his numerous sex-bias challenges to stadium Mother’s-Day events and the like (Jun. 12, etc.). A coupon settlement with $260,000 in attorney’s fees is mentioned.
Rick Reilly on the Oakland Mother’s Day-stadium suit
By reader acclaim: ESPN’s Rick Reilly is righteously hacked off at California serial litigator Alfred Rava and his sex discrimination settlement over an Oakland A’s breast cancer promotion which gave out floppy sun hats on Mother’s Day to women attending the game but not (horrors) to men. (“Make $100 the sleazy way“):
So how many guys have lined up to get their rightful floppy-hat-equivalent payment that was stolen from them by those selfish Mother’s Day-manipulating women? “Well, I haven’t taken a single call so far,” said the 1-888 operator at the firm handling claims. “And I’m here just about every day.”
Earlier coverage of Rava’s Oakland suit here, and on his earlier suit over an Anaheim Angels Mother’s Day tote bag giveaway here, here, here, and here.
Update: Taster’s Choice guy award before Calif. high court
At PoL, Michael Krauss comments on the latest stage in the appeal of Christoff v. Nestle USA, the $15.6 million award over using a model’s photo on a coffee label without ensuring the proper permissions were in place. Earlier here and here. More: Lowering the Bar.
Thumb-in-the-eye II: Cal Supremes affirm Buell-Wilson
We’ve been following Buell-Wilson v. Ford for some time, including the U.S. Supreme Court remand. Curt Cutting’s blog has the latest in two April posts here and here. Cal Biz Lit also has good commentary.