Worth a Look
July 29, 2010
Kevin Underhill, a partner at Shook, Hardy and Bacon, runs a great blog called Lowering the Bar dedicated to demonstrating that “legal humor” isn’t an oxymoron. Some of the most recent gems include this post on a lawsuit against a store that “failed to warn the plaintiff that playing with a sharp sword … would result in the plaintiff slicing his hand.” (h/t Walter Olson) Then there’s the $4.25 million verdict in the case of the missing pet turkeys in South Carolina. You gotta read it to believe it.
The Lawsuit Culture, Vol. 549,508
July 1, 2010
Your son gets cut from a hockey travel team. Do you: A) Praise him because he tried his best? B) Assure him there are other teams? C) Sue the coach? If you’re the parents of two disappointed Toronto midget junior players, you dial up your lawyer and demand $25,000 in a desperate attempt to reverse the “irreparable psychological damage” done to your son.
As a hockey dad, I can tell you flat out, this is more about the irreparable psychological damage done to mom and dad. Players are disappointed, but they get over it. Here’s hoping that yahoo parent with a hockey puck for brains gets stuck with paying court costs and every other fee that’s possible with this nutty and unnecessary lawsuit.
Unfortunately, it looks like a lawsuit-happy culture is one of America’s leading exports to Canada.
Litigation Costs Hurting New Jersey Schools
June 29, 2010
Think tort reform is a “business” concern? Read this article which reports on the toll litigation costs take on school district budgets.
“The average New Jersey school district allocates approximately $26,000 each school year for litigation expense. in seven districts, this figure was higher than $500,000 for the 2009-2010 school year.”
In one district - School District of the Chathams - legal expenses are budgeted to be $1.26 million for 2010-2011. This is the kind of money that could be spent on “textbooks and teachers and field trips and fund things for kids,” says the district’s business administrator.
Instead, it will go to lawyers.
$8.22 coupon for you…$21 million for me
June 25, 2010
Daniel Fisher over at On the Docket reports on yet another Powerball payday for class action trial attorneys. This time, the lawyers make off with $21 million in fees. The plaintiffs? $8.22 coupons.
Sigh.
Keeping the Lawsuit Factory Humming
June 23, 2010
The Center for Science in the Public Interest is threatening to go to court to battle one of the great scourges of our age: Happy Meals. In a letter to McDonald’s, the self-appointed advocacy group claims:
“McDonald’s marketing has the effect of conscripting America’s children into an unpaid drone army of word-of-mouth marketers causing them to nag their parents to bring them to McDonald’s.”
As the father of two “unpaid drones,” I guess I should be happy the Center is looking out for me and the millions of other hapless parents who dutifully march through the golden arches every day to quiet our kids with a few McNuggets and a fifty-cent piece of plastic. And the Center wants to make it clear they are on our side:
“At some point parents get worn down. They don’t always want to be saying no to their children. We feel like an awful lot of parents would be relieved if this one pressure was removed from them.”
But is getting kids to stop nagging their parents really the work of America’s legal system? If so, I’ve got a long list of lawsuits to keep the Center busy.
Turning a Nap into False Imprisonment
June 5, 2010
Walter Olson’s invaluable Overlawyered links to the story of a woman who is suing an airline because she was left asleep in a plane after it had landed. Upon waking up about three hours later in an empty plane, the woman was confused, but otherwise unharmed – at least that’s how she appeared to the airport security officers who escorted her off the plane about 15 minutes later. Behind every whacky lawsuit, there’s usually a sleazy lawyer. Enter Geoffrey Fieger, who is now accusing the airline of “false imprisonment, negligence emotional duress and breach of contract.” Fieger is about as sleazy as they come.
More On Michigan Case: “Who Knew Carbon Monoxide Kills”?
May 26, 2010
Walter Olson at Overlawyered links to a great piece by Daniel Fisher of Forbes. (I blogged on this earlier this week).
Fisher’s piece, “Who Knew That Carbon Monoxide Kills?”, concerns the lawsuit over the death of a Michigan man by carbon monoxide poisoning. The man, an experienced mechanic, died while repairing his car inside his closed garage while the engine idled. His family charges the muffler repair kit manufacturer with failing to warn about the dangers of repairing mufflers indoors.
The trial judge dismissed the case for reasons, Fisher notes, “that should be obvious to anyone born in the 20th Century.” Namely, running an engine inside a closed garage is dangerous! Read more
The Class Action Industry
May 21, 2010
Walter Olson, now with the Cato Institute, links to a study by Vanderbilt University Law Professor Brian Fitzpatrick on Overlawyered.com.
Professor Fitzpatrick examined every federal class action settlement in 2006 and 2007 and found - surprise, surprise - that trial lawyers are making a killing. The 688 class actions settled during this time period resulted in nearly $33 billion in payments, including about $5 billion to attorneys.
You can find the study here.
Starbucks Suit: What Happened to Personal Responsibility?
May 21, 2010
Court Koenning of the Houston Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse has a common-sense piece in the Southeast Texas Record worth a quick read. He writes: “We need to realize that every dilemma or personal disappointment is not fodder for a lawsuit and does not warrant a treasure trove of cash.”
Legal Reform Falters in South Carolina
May 4, 2010
South Carolina ranked 39th on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s 2010 list of state legal climates – well behind its neighbors in North Carolina (17th) and Georgia (27th). So after the state House passed strong, bipartisan legal reform legislation, what does the state Senate do? Water down the bill to the point of irrelevance – or worse, according to Fitsnews.com.
Cam Crawford of the South Carolina Civil Justice Coalition calls the current version “unacceptable” and called on Senators to put some teeth back in the bill. Read more