Posts Tagged ‘class actions’

Claim: Chuck E. Cheese kids’ games amount to gambling

“A San Diego woman has sued the company that owns the Chuck E. Cheese’s family restaurant chain, claiming that many of the games intended for children at these locations are actually illegal gambling devices — like slot machines.” [San Diego Union-Tribune, Above the Law (“Can you imagine growing up and being known as the kid whose mom sued Chuck E. Cheese?”)] For other class actions based on creative theories that something “amounts to” gambling, see this site’s reports from 1999 (Pokémon and other kids’ trading/collecting cards) and 2008 (“Deal or No Deal” TV show).

May 10 roundup

  • Hey, why don’t we invade people’s privacy so we can recruit them as figureheads for our privacy-invasion class action? [Cal Biz Lit, earlier on Starbucks pot-convictions case] Class-action coupon settlements are a no-win for consumers [Michelle Singletary, WaPo]
  • “Former Silicosis Clients Sue O’Quinn Law Firm, Estate” [Texas Lawyer via PoL, related earlier]
  • Gathering ammunition for suits: “Are your employees recording you?” [Hyman]
  • Canada: “Inflatables too dangerous for school fair” [Free-Range Kids]
  • Evaluating the effectiveness of medical liability reforms [Kachalia & Mello, NEJM]
  • “Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About ‘Judge Judy’” [TV Squad]
  • “Woman awarded $45,000 after dog kills cat” [six years ago on Overlawyered]

N.C.: “Orange County Rescue Squad suit tossed”

The director of Orange County, N.C. emergency services had terminated the squad following complaints of unprofessionalism from other emergency responders, and it proceeded to sue. “The lawsuit, filed in federal court, claimed to be a class-action lawsuit for all the citizens of Orange County and those who transit through Orange County, but U.S. District Judge William J. Osteen Jr. wrote in his opinion that the rescue squad lacked standing to bring a class action lawsuit.” [Herald-Sun; background, Daily Tar Heel]

April 26 roundup

  • Study of how class action lawyers interact with their named clients [Stephen Meili via Trask]
  • California releases numbers on how bounty-hunting lawyers did in 2010 under Prop 65 environmental-warning law [Cal Biz Lit]
  • According to the tale, lender errors in foreclosure gave Florida borrower home free and clear. Actual story may be more complicated than that [Funnell]
  • The very long discovery arm of the Philadelphia, and Pennsylvania, courts [Drug & Device Law, more]
  • UK law firm “could face big bill” after sending thousands of file-sharing demand letters [ABA Journal]
  • Goodbye to men’s track at U. of Delaware, and the women’s team is suffering too, as often happens with Title IX [Saving Sports]
  • OSHA’s proposed “illness and injury prevention program” (I2P2) termed a “Super Rule” with potentially widespread economic impact [Kirsanow, NRO]

“FindLaw Legal Bloggers Sue for Overtime Pay”

It’s not getting one-ten-thousandth the coverage of Mr. Tasini’s suit against the Huffington Post, perhaps because it’s not based on quite such an exotic set of legal theories. FindLaw pays staffers to write legal blogs and the suit charges that they were encouraged/allowed to work unpaid overtime. [ABA Journal] Eric B. Meyer has more (“Working through lunch may create overtime issues for employers”).

“A nation of Winklevosses”

Amid the general hail of dead cats that commentators have aimed at the class action suit claiming to speak for unpaid Huffington Post bloggers, Jack Shafer’s contribution stands out (action “proves that we’re becoming a nation of Winklevosses who file legal motion after legal motion every time a pot of money is spotted….the proper time to negotiate payment for an article is before publication”).