Friday, May 19, 2006

Attend at your own risk
A man recently sued the Angels for sex discrimination because he was not given a tote bag as part of a Mother’s Day promotion.
Inspired by this litigious douchebaggery, the Altoona Curve (AA - Pittsburgh) are having Frivolous Lawsuit Night. I’m not a big fan of the concept; most notoriously “frivilous” lawsuits are actually meritorious but popularized in deceptive ways by insurance companies that hate paying the judgments. The McDonald’s coffee case is the prime example. (If you ever want a boring lecture from me, bring that up at a party as a symbol of the tort system run amok.)
Still, I like the whimsy behind the Curve’s promotions:
* A Pink Tote Bag Giveaway to the first 137 men in attendance ages 18 and over
* The first 137 women 18 and over will receive lukewarm coffee so they will not burn themselves
* The first 137 kids will be given a beach ball with a warning not to ingest it
Hat tip to Bucs Dugout.
Wednesday, May 10, 2006

This is what it sounds like when judges cry
4th Circuit Judge Michael Luttig is stepping down from the bench to take a job at Boeing.
Waaaaaah! George didn’t put me on the Supreme Court! Waaaaaaaaaah! I’m taking my 1700’s legal doctrine and going home!
By the way, how does a judge send around resumes? How does a corporation solicit a judge to work for it without forever conflicting out the judge from future matters?
Thursday, March 30, 2006

Hey, look! Content! Sort of.
Georgia cops gave a woman a summons for having a vulgar anti-Bush sticker (I’m tired of all the BUSHIT!) on her car.
The driver’s defense is discrimination. Nobody ever got a ticket for the “ IMPEACH CUNTON” stickers that were all the rage in the late ‘90s.
Hat tip to Clarified
Wednesday, February 02, 2005

Predicting the next reality show
I’m basically a believer in legalized prostitution. It is sort of a libertarian-meets-prurient-interest thing. This, on the other hand is going too far: now that prostitution is legal in Germany, women may lose their unemployment benefits for refusing work as prostitutes.
Coming soon on Fox: Conscript Hookers
It seems that brothels are now posting positions in job centers and a refusal to punish benefits-recipients for turning down work can lead to a suit by the brothel against the job center. The epitome of heartlessness is one such brothel owner:
Tatiana Ulyanova, who owns a brothel in central Berlin, has been searching the online database of her local job centre for recruits.
“Why shouldn’t I look for employees through the job centre when I pay my taxes just like anybody else?” said Miss Ulyanova.
Stop frowning sweetie, the customers are complaining. Now wipe off your face and get back in the lounge.
Hat tip to Read Less...
Monday, June 28, 2004

Freedom isn't free. Nor is it available for everyone at any price.
If a lawyer is going to have a blog, then the terrorism cases are what I should be writing about. Unfortunately, I don’t have time just this second. So instead, I will give it short shrift and let my feelings ooze from the text.
Let me get this straight:
The Supremes decided in Rasul v. Bush that a foreign national detained at the Guantanamo naval base is entitled to habeas relief as if he were being held in the United States itself. Since Gitmo is, for all intents and purposes, a permanent U.S. facility this was the only reasonable decision. Still, that didn’t prevent a 5-1-3 vote. Of course, any hopes that this right would be immediately meaningful were dashed when the decision in Hamdi came out. (Negative points for the majority for a confusing and unnecessarily complicated job of distinguishing the Eisentrager precedent. A better opinion would have made the dissent look foolish instead of merely wrong.)
In Hamdi v. Rumsfeld the Court decided that a U.S. Citizen captured abroad and held in the U.S. as an enemy combatant, the detainee can protest the fact of his designation as an enemy combatant (but not any specific military charges) in a proceeding where (a) hearsay is admissible and (b) the government gets all presumptions. Interesting notion of due process. You don’t get charged with a crime and the “evidence” against you actually requires scare quotes. (Bonus points to Scalia and Stevens for being the only Justices to get this right and holding that actual charges must be brought if Hamdi is to be detained. Serious negative points to Thomas for believing that war justifies the creation of martial law.)
Finally, and most offensively, the Supremes committed the most egregious punt of the term. After punting on the Pledge of Allegiance and Energy Task Force cases, the biggest shank off of the Court’s foot came today in Rumsfeld v. Padilla. Instead of answering the question concerning the liberty of all Americans within our nation’s borders, the Court chose to dismiss the case on obscure venue grounds. Yes, Padilla can refile in South Carolina. In the meantime, he remains in prison without any charges and without any recourse. And for all conspiracy theorists out there, all of the Republicans (unless people still want to argue that Souter is a Republican) voted to decide this case in such a way as to make it unlikely to be resolved before the election.
What a bunch of fucking pussies.
Wednesday, December 17, 2003

No Sex Toys In Texas
A woman in Texas (and a member of the local chamber of commerce) faces charges after a sting operation on a Tuperware style party that features sex toys—or, as they are known by the politically correct, marital aids. Apparently, adult stores get around Texas laws by posting signs that say the toys should only be used as novelties, while these women had the audacity to not participate in that little charade.
It is good to know that the Texas police are keeping dildos out of our bedrooms, but if everything is bigger in Texas, I am not sure what they are so worried about.

No Sex Toys In Texas
A woman in Texas (and a member of the local chamber of commerce) faces charges after a sting operation on a Tuperware style party that features sex toys—or, as they are known by the politically correct, marital aids. Apparently, adult stores get around Texas laws by posting signs that say the toys should only be used as novelties, while these women had the audacity to not participate in that little charade.
It is good to know that the Texas police are keeping dildos out of our bedrooms, but if everything is bigger in Texas, I am not sure what they are so worried about.
Thursday, December 11, 2003

Price is right!
Mike Price alabama football U.S. District Judge Lynwood Smith Sports Illustrated SI
Ugarte and Rick, be careful about what you say about dem folks down in Alabama! One of Signor Ferrari’s many sources in the Casablanca underworld forwarded this article on a surprising court order that under Alabama law a magazine (and other media) must reveal its sources in a libel and slander action precisely because it is a magazine and not a newspaper.
Over the summer, Mike Price who had been named the head coach of the University of Alabama’s fabled college football factory after the 2002 season, was fired before he ever coached a game because of allegations involving strip clubs, strippers, sex, exorbitant room service bills (by the strippers) and lots and lots of drinking.
Sports Illustrated wrote a piece about Price’s wild weekend and he sued for slander and libel, alleging that not all of the things in the story were true (such as the sex with strippers, he does not dispute the heavy drinking and strip club attendance). Price recently won a motion to have SI reveal its sources for the story.
The basis of this ruling by a Federal District Court Judge in Alabama was that while Alabama law protects newspaper, television and radio reporters from revealing their sources, magazines and other media are not explicitly mentioned in the statute. The court found that magazines are thus not protected and SI has to give up the strippers.
Signor Ferrari will be busy the rest of the afternoon as he switches his “investments” from magazines and blogs to newspapers and televised media.
Read Less...

Price is right!
Ugarte and Rick, be careful about what you say about dem folks down in Alabama! One of Signor Ferrari’s many sources in the Casablanca underworld forwarded this article on a surprising court order that under Alabama law a magazine (and other media) must reveal its sources in a libel and slander action precisely because it is a magazine and not a newspaper.
Over the summer, Mike Price who had been named the head coach of the University of Alabama’s fabled college football factory after the 2002 season, was fired before he ever coached a game because of allegations involving strip clubs, strippers, sex, exorbitant room service bills (by the strippers) and lots and lots of drinking.
Sports Illustrated wrote a piece about Price’s wild weekend and he sued for slander and libel, alleging that not all of the things in the story were true (such as the sex with strippers, he does not dispute the heavy drinking and strip club attendance). Price recently won a motion to have SI reveal its sources for the story.
The basis of this ruling by a Federal District Court Judge in Alabama was that while Alabama law protects newspaper, television and radio reporters from revealing their sources, magazines and other media are not explicitly mentioned in the statute. The court found that magazines are thus not protected and SI has to give up the strippers.
Signor Ferrari will be busy the rest of the afternoon as he switches his “investments” from magazines and blogs to newspapers and televised media.
Read Less...

Does anyone else find these ads disturbing?
They belong to a NYC personal injury law firm and they appear on NYC subways. They’re hilarious, but also very creepy.
Obviously, there is something unsettling about the notion that these people are pleased (indeed, with their big smiles and thumbs-ups they look positively overjoyed) that the doctor has dropped a major organ during surgery, or that a hand has been mangled by machinery. When I saw the woman with the baby, I was doubly disturbed by the idea that she was delighted that her child had been poisoned, presumably because it turned the little snotrag into a cash cow (of course, the baby is also giving the thumbs-up sign, and probably is smiling behind his gas mask).
I guess what I find fundamentally disturbing about these ads is that they suggest not just that a monetary recovery can adequately compensate a victim of negligence for their injury (something I think is rarely, if ever true), but that it can actually make the victim happy that they were injured. It oversells the plaintiffs’ bar, and for the wrong reasons. I have mixed feelings about the tort system, but I do think that personal injury suits can be an effective way to regulate certain industries or entities while also obtaining compensation for victims. Nonetheless, to me these ads also seem to implicitly endorse the seamier side of tort law: the greed that often motivates the lawyers (and sometimes the plaintiffs) more than a desire to achieve justice.
Read Less...
Page 1 of 1 pages