If you’re not visiting our sister site Point of Law regularly you’re missing out on an awful lot. F’rinstance: contingency-fee tax collection in Mississippi, courtesy of that state’s AG; Alan Dershowitz’s coincidental whereabouts during the Larry Summers flap; liability reform in Georgia, South Carolina and Missouri, and (on asbestos) in Texas and Florida; topical TrackBack spam pings; the “Constitution in Exile” brouhaha; overtime lawsuits; crying wolf on class action reform; pressure for cooperation in white-collar crime cases; how Westchester County, N.Y. residents subsidize wildman enviro-litigator Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and California residents subsidize trial-lawyer front groups as well as propaganda for antitrust enforcement; jury selection in Scotland; several posts on The American Lawyer’s recent special issue, “Plaintiff’s Power”; the supposed hypocrisy of lawsuit reformers; high-tech shareholder suits; much, much more from Ted on silicosis doctors’ testimony; Mike DeBow on Ford Crown Victoria suits; and Jim Copland on the Second Circuit’s dismissal of a tobacco class action. And don’t miss Ted’s priceless story of what happened to ATLA’s own insurance company (did you really think those guys would be good at running one?).
Posts Tagged ‘Missouri’
American Justice Partnership
This new organization, among other functions, serves as a clearinghouse for the latest information about litigation reform efforts around the country; its site has updates on the recent progress of such legislation in Missouri, South Carolina, Florida and elsewhere. The AJP also recently produced an audio feature (downloadable/streamable) in which three of us (myself, Steven B. Hantler of the DaimlerChrysler Corp., and Fox News commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano) discuss the topic, specifically from the standpoint of: what can a business person do to make a difference? If you’re interested in the ongoing battle over litigation reform, you’ll want to spend some time checking out the whole site.
Free speech prevails in “trash terrorists” case
In a case closely watched by free-speech advocates, a Missouri appeals court has dismissed as meritless a defamation suit brought by a trash company against a man who had successfully fought its plan to site a transfer station in his suburban St. Louis neighborhood. Leaflets opposing the facility had referred to the company, Fred Weber Inc., as “trash terrorists”, but the court found that “rhetorical hyperbole” of that sort, even if overheated, would not suggest to a reasonable audience that company officials engage in actual bombings or murders. Concern over the case has led to efforts in the Missouri legislature to broaden protections against being sued for taking part in public discussions. (Leisa Zigman, “County Resident Wins ‘SLAPP’ Suit Ruling Against Fred Weber, Inc.”, KSDK.com, Mar. 8; “Slapping down Weber” (editorial), St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Mar. 9; Tim Jones, “Lawsuit trashed as threat to speech”, Chicago Tribune, Mar. 9). More: opinion is here.
KMBZ-AM Kansas City
Host Jerry Agar had me on this morning to talk about the NYC government’s attempt to impose gun control nationwide (see yesterday’s post for more details and a link to my Times piece). And many thanks to the various bloggers who’ve linked the piece, starting with Glenn Reynolds.
Car veers into truck’s lane
…and so a jury has ordered the trucking company, Auction Transport Inc., to pay $22.5 million over the resulting injuries to a young passenger in the accident, which occurred at rush hour on Kansas City’s I-435. Mary Coleman’s car, allegedly sideswiped by a third vehicle, had careened in front of the truck, but attorneys argued that the truck driver had been “driving too fast in congested traffic and not watching the road.” The jury found the trucking company responsible for just less than half the fault of the accident — a greater share of fault than the allegedly sideswiping driver — and Coleman for hardly any of it; the application of Missouri’s joint and several liability rule ensures that the company will be on the hook for nearly the entire amount. Good thing the truck had not swerved unpredictably into the car’s path to cause the accident — then it would have been more the fault of the car than of any other party, right? (Joe Lambe, “Crash victim awarded millions”, Kansas City Star, Sept. 25). More: CoyoteBlog comments.
Center for Justice & Democracy’s Zany “Zany Immunity Law Awards”
Many farmers use anhydrous ammonia as fertilizer, because it provides vital nitrogen nutrients to the soil. The combustible material is produced in Louisiana, and then shipped to the Midwest on barges or through pipelines, and then stored on tanks on farms. However, ammonia is also useful for making illegal methamphetamines, and thefts are a regular problem. (KOMU-TV, “Law Officers Fight Ammonia Thefts”, May 19). If a thief injures himself tampering with an ammonia tank, should he be able to sue the farmer for the injury? Three states, Kansas, Missouri, and Wyoming, say no, and provide immunity for those who store, handle, or own ammonia equipment from suit by thieves. Legislatures are considering the issue in other midwestern states.
The misnamed anti-tort reform Center for Justice & Democracy has noticed the success of the ATRA’s judicial hellhole campaign (Dec. 15; Dec. 3, 2003), and decided to respond with its own report, the “Zany Immunity Law Awards”, intended to single out “special interests” who opportunistically subvert the legislative system to get improper immunity from liability. The cover shows a legislator receiving a statuette, cash in his pocket, and roses with a ribbon labeled “Sleaziest Legislation.”
Exposing sleazy special-interest immunity laws is a noble sentiment–but it’s a sure sign of how few and far between such laws are that CJD singles out the sensible anhydrous ammonia immunity laws for its top ten list. The CJD incorrectly blames the law on a supposed “anhydrous ammonia business lobby”; in fact, it’s groups like the Michigan Farm Bureau that push for laws like Michigan S.B. 786. Indeed, the only group to oppose such laws? Trial lawyers’ lobbying groups. See also Kelly Lenz, “Fertilizer law to help farmers”, Farm and Auction, Jun. 12, 2002.
How ridiculous are the CJD awards? One of the top ten “zany immunity laws” refers to “immunity” granted to placebo manufacturers and distributors. Except the immunity in question isn’t immunity–it’s an exception to a criminal statute prohibiting the sale of fake drugs! E.g., Fla. Stat. 817.564(6)(a). (This is the only appearance of the word “placebo” in the Florida Code. It’s telling that CJD omits the statutory cite in its footnotes.) Perhaps this law is zany, but it’s hardly an example of a special interest group buying sleazy legislation that damages consumers. A subject of a research test who is injured by adulterated placebos (has this ever happened?) will still have a cause of action.
Tobacco class action update
Plaintiffs defending the insane $10.1 billion class action judgment (Feb. 8; Mar. 24, 2003) have retained as co-counsel a law firm associated with a Republican Illinois Supreme Court justice in an effort to have him disqualified from the case. (Paul Hampel, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, “Smaller court may hear tobacco case in Madison County”, Oct. 3; Ameet Sachdev, “Philip Morris seeks removal of law firm”, Chicago Tribune, Sep. 1 (no longer online)). The Edwardsville Intelligencer (in a strange story whose math seems to be wrong in other particulars) reports that Madison County has received a $1.7 million windfall in interest from Philip Morris from the bond (Apr. 4, 2003) it posted to appeal that judgment. (Steve Horrell, “County is cashing in”, Oct. 8).
The Seattle Times has a retrospective look back at the comprehensive tobacco settlement (Feb. 28 and links therein) negotiated in large part by Washington state Attorney General Christine Gregoire, and notes the irony that it forced the state to ally itself with Philip Morris to protest the amount of the bond (see also Apr. 30, 2003). (Andrew Garber, “Tobacco settlement Gregoire negotiated not popular with all”, Oct. 4). But the bad news for Altria shareholders, states hoping to continue receiving tobacco funds, and the ability of Americans to conduct business is that plaintiffs continue to pile on with similarly meritless class action lawsuits, waiting to find the combination of judges who dislike tobacco companies enough to expand class action law rather than rule in their favor. Plaintiffs’ lawyers will bring dozens of these lawsuits, and need win only one multi-billion dollar judgment to become the new owners of the enterprise. The Massachusetts Supreme Court recently signed off on a class action against Philip Morris, and lower courts in Missouri and Ohio have followed suit. (AP, Sep. 17; Theo Emery, AP, Aug. 16).
Victory in St. Louis (again)
“Saying a newly revised Missouri law bars such legal action, a state appeals court refused Tuesday to reinstate the city’s [St. Louis’s] lawsuit that sought compensation from gunmakers, distributors and related trade groups for gun-related injuries. … Tuesday’s decision upheld a St. Louis County judge’s dismissal last October of the city’s 1999 lawsuit. In that ruling, Circuit Judge Emmett O’Brien said such lawsuits would open ‘a floodgate to additional litigation,’ and that ‘issues of both logic and fairness’ favored throwing out the case.” (Jim Suhr, “Appeals court rejects St. Louis city’s lawsuit against gunmakers”, AP/Kansas City Star, Jul. 27)(via Conservative Contrarian)(see Oct. 29).
More: One of the few bright spots for the anti-gun side has been a decision by the Indiana Supreme Court allowing the city of Gary’s suit to stay alive. The victory however was not exactly a famous one: “Although Indiana’s high court ruled that the city’s pleadings were legally sufficient, the unanimous panel expressed skepticism that Gary’s counsel could connect all of the links in the causal chain from manufacturer to injured party.” (Andrew Harris, “Court reinstates Indiana gun suit”, National Law Journal, Jan. 5).
Batch of reader letters
Fresh on our letters page, we’ve managed to post another four reader letters from our backlog. Among topics this time: the bizarre prison death of a serial killer in Missouri; a generous assessment of what we do here from a plaintiff’s trial lawyer in Chicago; we get called disingenuous, cynical, and other bad things because of our comment on a lawsuit demanding that school bus windows be redesigned; and a reader wonders whether accounting crimes which destroy life savings ought not to be seen as comparable to violent crimes which destroy lives themselves.
Batch of reader letters
We’ve posted four more reader letters on our letters page. Topics this time: a lawyer who won a $50 million award over the city of Chicago’s slow response to a 911 call (later settled for less) writes to take issue with our perspective on the case; a Texan who worked for 35 years in the Social Security disability program believes that as the process has become more legally contentious it has grown both slower and less fair; Missouri employment lawyer George Lenard discusses the recent, widely publicized “popcorn butter” workplace-injury verdict; and a North Carolina lawyer shows some exasperation with us.