close
The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20101015141438/http://overlawyered.com/

A former “omega male” offers a dissent. [Elie Mystal, Above the Law]

{ 0 comments }

Using a patent acquired from the much-criticized Intellectual Ventures, a company called Webvention claims to control broad rights over many common website features such as mouse rollover previews. It has begun suing many well-known companies (in East Texas, naturally) for alleged infringement; its licensing come-on letter to one target warned that if the $80,000 fee was not forthcoming the sum would rise after 60 days to $160,000 and after 90 days to $300,000. [Ars Technica; Joe Mullin, Patent Litigation Weekly]

{ 0 comments }

The New York Times brings word of a study with arresting findings published in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine:

Researchers examined the records of 595 children nationwide, all at similar high risk for maltreatment, tracking them from ages 4 to 8. During those years, Child Protective Services investigated the families of 164 of these children for suspected abuse or neglect. The scientists then interviewed all the families four years later, comparing the investigated families with the 431 families that had not been investigated.

The scientists looked at several factors: social support, family functioning, poverty, caregiver education and depressive symptoms, and child anxiety, depression and aggressive behavior — all known to increase the risk for abuse or neglect. But they were unable to find any differences in the investigated families compared with the uninvestigated in any of these dimensions, except that maternal depressive symptoms were worse in households that had been visited. … They concluded that Child Protective Services investigations had little or no effect.

The researchers considered but rejected the possibility that the investigated households were inherently more dysfunctional than the comparison households but were improved enough by the investigations to achieve similar outcomes. Surprisingly or otherwise, though unable to find a positive effect, the researchers defend the continued existence of the investigation bureaus, contending that they must be doing some good. On the other hand, the pediatric journal, under the editorial headline of “Child Protective Services Has Outlived Its Usefulness,” suggests a shift toward greater reliance on nurses as opposed to investigators in cases where neglect is the issue, backed up by police in cases where treatment of children is actually criminal.

There is a possible money waste involved here, of course: Child Protective Services is a costly program, shaped by federal mandates. But any reckoning must include a less tangible cost: the devastating effects when parents are not in fact abusive or dangerous yet are put through investigations, or worse yet see their children taken away. Indeed, while it’s hard to deny that individual investigations can sometimes identify and help children in trouble, the difficulty of finding any overall effect suggests (if the study’s results are valid) that those successes may be canceled out by the instances in which investigation does harm — perhaps a bit more than canceled out, given that suggestive increase in “maternal depressive symptoms.”

For another angle on the harm investigative mistakes or zealotry can cause, here’s a Des Moines Register editorial:

Iowans are placed on the state’s child abuse registry because social workers determined they were a threat to children. Not a judge. Not a jury. Social workers who conduct abuse investigations. The accused abusers have limited time and opportunity to appeal the decision, and may wait more than a year to get their names removed if they can prove themselves innocent. If not, people remain on the registry for 10 years.

{ 3 comments }

Just a reminder for those in the area: on Monday afternoon at 5:30 I’ll be speaking at Tulane Law School, debating Prof. George Strickler on the role of the legal profession with Prof. Michael Pappas moderating, and a reception to follow. The next day, Tues. Oct. 19, I’ll give a lunchtime talk at Loyola-New Orleans on employment law and the ADA, with Prof. Craig Senn commenting. Both events are sponsored by student chapters of the Federalist Society and are open to the public.

{ 0 comments }

Fact-checking a Maine Congresswoman: my latest at Cato-at-Liberty.

{ 0 comments }

October 14 roundup

by Walter Olson on October 14, 2010

  • Gulf spill fund flooded with dubious claims [Fred Smith, CEI]
  • If these cases go forward, it will make it economically unfeasible for anyone to make vaccines in this country” [NYT quoting Beck on Bruesewitz v. Wyeth preemption case now before SCOTUS]
  • Barney Frank’s evolving views on Fannie/Freddie oversight [Mankiw, Globe]
  • $5.2 million legal bills to Michael Jackson estate [TMZ]
  • Frederick, Maryland pizzeria owner asked to pay $200K for unsolicited faxes [Gazette; my WSJ take four years ago]
  • UK: “Migration Watch” may sue critic [David Allen Green via Richard Wilson, more]
  • Parody of cheesy law firm promotes TV series “Breaking Bad” ["Better Call Saul", autoplays video/audio]
  • N.J.: “Drowns while fleeing cops, family sues for $50M” [five years ago on Overlawyered]

{ 0 comments }

The Wall Street Journal had a report Tuesday on newly mobilized sentiment among businesspeople intent on challenging the rapid ongoing expansion of federal governance and regulation. It profiles Rick Woldenberg, well known to readers of this site as a tireless agitator against the insanities of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act AnimalsBall1c(CPSIA) of 2008. Woldenberg had been an Obama voter and basically apathetic about politics until the CPSIA debacle unfolded, putting at risk his medium-sized educational products company and many other makers and sellers of basically harmless products for kids. The indifference of the federal establishment to the resulting distress in the business community — and in particular the deaf ear turned by such lawmakers as Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) — propelled Woldenberg into legislative activism (AmendTheCPSIA.com) and then politics, where he has backed Joel Pollak in an unusually strong challenge to Rep. Schakowsky in her Chicago-area district.

On CPSIA’s tendency to ban rocks used for study in Earth Science classes, see our earlier post.

PUBLIC DOMAIN IMAGE from Elise Bake, Der Ball Der Tiere (”The Animals’ Ball”, German, 1891), courtesy ChildrensLibrary.org.

{ 3 comments }

Mark Osler on RICO

by Walter Olson on October 14, 2010

Prof. Mark Osler, who specializes in criminal law at University of St. Thomas Law School in the Twin Cities, interviewed at Abnormal Use:

The pairing of civil and criminal RICO was one of the worst ideas a law professor ever had (yes, one of us dreamed that one up). The extensive rule-making by courts in civil RICO cases has made interpretation and use of the statute so confusing and inefficient that prosecutors avoid it if they can, preferring to charge money laundering or something under the fraud statutes. Given the current state of the law, in which civil RICO is used to tie people up in endless litigation, we would be better off without RICO in the federal code.

{ 0 comments }

In general, if a mortgage servicer engages in improper corner-cutting in assembling the documents for foreclosure, it doesn’t lose the right to recover the property from the delinquent borrower: it just has to go back and do the steps properly (assuming the borrower insists on that in a timely way). Even negligent loss of key documents is not enough to alter the underlying property rights, for reasons well expressed by the late “Tanta” at Calculated Risk two years ago (via John Carney and Business Insider):

A financial institution in the business of making mortgage loans has no business routinely losing or damaging original promissory notes, and any institution that does so should be shut down by the federal regulators and I mean that.

But if consumer attorneys want to create a situation in which the simple fact of loss of or irreparable damage to an original note vacates the debt, I can promise you you will not like the consequences of that. If it turns into Total War here, don’t ever lose an original cancelled check. You should know that there is actually one fairly respectable reason for doing [foreclosure] filings with note copies, besides servicer laziness or loan sale screw-ups: taking your original note out of the custodian’s vault to send to some local attorney to attach to a court filing creates several more opportunities for it to get lost. If it becomes a requirement that [foreclosure] can proceed only with the original note in the courtroom, and the presence of an LNA [lost note affidavit] always means dismissal, then the things are going to have to be handled and shipped and received with the same level of security as a million-dollar bearer bond. Like, a Brink’s truck and a bonded courier carrying a briefcase handcuffed to his wrist. You want to pay the cost of that? No. You don’t. But you will.

More: Ted at PoL, quoting Arnold Kling and more John Carney.

{ 9 comments }

In case you didn’t know. [California Civil Justice]

{ 0 comments }

Looks like the winner of a Taiwanese competition for a poster on the theme “Protect Copyright” will have to give back the medal and prize money [Lowering the Bar]

{ 0 comments }

In a preview of his much anticipated new book, Cardozo lawprof Lester Brickman examines contentions that caseload statistics do not bear out fears of a litigation explosion, and says these claims depend on severe undercounting of both cases and costs [TortsProf, PoL]

{ 0 comments }

Pennsylvania: “The Lower Merion School District will pay $610,000 to settle lawsuits over its tracking of student laptop computers, ending an eight-month saga that thrust the elite district into a global spotlight and stirred questions about technology and privacy in schools.” Specifically, $175,000 will go to two students who sued, and $425,000 to their lawyer, while lawyers and computer specialists hired by the school in its defense have billed more than $1 million. “And the attorney for at least one other student has notified the district that he was contemplating a lawsuit.” [Philadelphia Inquirer, Balko, Kennerly]

{ 9 comments }

This time it’s Patterico on the receiving end. Excerpt: “I have filed over a hundred lawsuits and another one will be no sweat for me. On the other hand, it will cost you a lot of time and money and for what.”

{ 1 comment }

October 12 roundup

by Walter Olson on October 12, 2010

  • Representing Prof. Michael Krauss, Ted Frank will file objection to Classmates.com class action settlement [CCAF]
  • Not without condescension, Harvard historian/New Yorker writer Jill Lepore asks why Woodrow Wilson’s so disliked these days; Radley Balko offers some help [The Agitator, NYT "Room for Debate"]
  • China needs true private property rights, according to Charter 08 document, which helped Liu Xiaobo win Nobel Peace Prize [Tyler Cowen]
  • Axelrod “foreign funders under every rug” demagogy might be turned against his own allies [Stoll; New York Times refutes earlier Obama talking point; Atlantic Wire; Sullum]
  • R.I.P. influential class actions and mass torts scholar Richard Nagareda [Vanderbilt Law School]
  • “Web Seminar Makes Case for Patent Troll Lawsuit Targets to Fight Back” [Washington Legal Foundation Legal Pulse]
  • Contrary to WSJ report, if Congressional staffers are profiting in stock trades by way of insider knowledge, they probably do face some risk of legal liability [Bainbridge; a not entirely unrelated inside-trading controversy]
  • Underpublicized: “California’s Proposed ‘Green Chemistry’ Regulations Move Forward” [Wajert]

{ 2 comments }

“I don’t feel bad about being a scofflaw — our distillation laws are preposterous.” [Cooking Issues]

{ 0 comments }

It’s resulted in a life-size lawsuit: “Bruce McCandless, the NASA astronaut pictured small and floating in space above the Earth, is now suing Dido, Sony Music, Arista Records and Getty Images for using his picture.” [Eriq Gardner, THR Esq.; Bruce Carton, Legal Blog Watch]

{ 10 comments }

Members of Congress are oh so shocked that bank mortgage departments would use robo-signers.

{ 4 comments }