- Burning Man, risk, and self-reliance [Claire Gordon, related]
- Jacob Sullum challenges Mark “tax-the-snacks” Bittman [Reason; related, Rick Esenberg] “Fat tax” would be hard to target, hard to enforce, disliked by voters [David Gratzer]
- “CSX claims racketeering in Pittsburgh law firm’s legal tactics” [Post-Gazette; earlier here, here, here, etc.] A different view: Max Kennerly.
- Complaints over new class-action law in Canada [Reuters]
- Minnesota preacher sues Rachel Maddow [TVNewser, Mother Jones]
- Does the new Texas loser-pays bill go far enough? [Kyle Baum, WLF, earlier]
- Tell us about it: “Why the Right to Criticize Lawyers is Vital” [Hans Bader, CEI]
- Adios to Rum and Coke? “FDA, FTC crack down on caffeinated alcoholic drinks” [WaPo]
- Flap over Justice Alito’s attendance at conservative magazine’s dinner may be much ado about nothing [Steele, Legal Ethics Forum]
- “Cops Threaten Mom for Letting [8 Year Old] Son Play Outside” [Free-Range Kids]
- Contrary to some assertions, American courts from early on did recognize that tort liability could run into First Amendment constitutional limits [Eugene Volokh, Iowa Law Review, PDF]
- Woman pleads guilty to insurance fraud after obtaining $300,000 over low-speed auto collision [Seattle P-I]
- Well-known examples to the contrary, regulation doesn’t always favor big business against small [Bryan Caplan]
- Should “professional plaintiffs” have standing? [Brandon Murrill, William & Mary Law Review, PDF]
- Blonds not protected class under federal employment discrimination law, judge declares [six years ago on Overlawyered]
“Prosecutors say a group of top lawyers and doctors conspired to collect millions in inflated damages by pushing accident victims into dubious surgery.” Riveting, detail-filled account of the alleged involvement of numerous Nevada lawyers and as many as 20 doctors in what prosecutors say was boldly and systematically organized misconduct, with even some sectors of the judiciary in the state at best cowed by the scheme’s managers. An elegant touch: physicians who played ball are said to have been assured protection from malpractice suits from many feared attorneys, while those not in on the scheme appear in some cases to have been at extra peril. This looks to be one of the year’s most important ventures into investigative journalism on the underside of litigation — don’t even think of missing it [Katherine Eban, Fortune, Aug. 19] More: discussed by Darleen Click and commenters, Protein Wisdom.
It only takes a couple of incidents like these for the system to pay for itself, and that’s aside from the anti-shoplifting benefits.
“Five of 12 Fayette residents charged in a joint FBI and IRS criminal investigation have pleaded guilty, and one more is expected to plead guilty this week, U.S. Assistant Attorney John Dowdy said. … Each resident received a $250,000 settlement from the drug maker. Court documents show some of the defendants purchased automobiles, including a new Jaguar, and one bought a mobile home.” One of the defendants — not the one who bought the Jag — is described by her lawyer as just your ordinary Sunday School teacher. (Jimmie E. Gates, “Fraud pleas may mean jail, forfeiture”, Jackson Clarion Ledger, Nov. 7). See Oct. 20 and links from there.