The next time you’re wondering why airline ticket prices are so high, after you consider rising oil prices and government regulation, add frivolous lawsuits to your list.

A woman has sued American Airlines for serving peanuts on a flight despite her four-year-old son’s allergy to peanuts and her notification to the airline of the allergy.  She claims she was assured several times that peanuts would not be served. But she says flight attendants changed the plan without notice.

It is true that an allergic reaction to peanuts can range from a minor irritation to a life-threatening condition. Even people who have only had a mild reaction in the past are at risk of a more serious future reaction.  And peanut allergies can be set off by inhalation, ingestion, and sometimes through direct skin contact. It has also been shown that airplanes can harbor peanut protein in their air filters.

Here is the most important point: a search of both PeanutAllergy.com and The Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Network, and the CDC will result in no documented cases of fatal anaphylactic reaction for direct skin contact or inhalation.  In other words no one has died as the peanut fascists would like us to believe so they can justify this tyranny of the minority.

The Mayo Clinic lists ways to keep kids safe from these allergies. These steps include all logical and reasonable ways to minimize risks and are not all that unusual or hard to follow.  I mean, how hard is it to keep your child, who’s sitting right next to you from eating peanuts? How about don’t feed him any! 

And if she was honestly so concerned about the problem through air filtering systems, she shouldn’t even be taking the flight in the first place.

Please tell me what does this lawsuit achieve besides hurting the airline, showing the ugly selfishness of a parent teaching the wrong lessons to her kid and lining the pockets of some greedy attorney who will make most of the settlement money the airline offers to get this thing behind them? What a great racket for the attorney! This endorses the narcissism, cowardice, victimhood and lack of personal responsibility that are the character of so many citizens and lawyers today.

How about this? Teach your child not to eat peanuts and avoid them. Kids cannot avoid all contact with peanuts, like everything else in life it’s a matter of balancing risks, at some point, you just have to go out and live.

If people like this get their way and the lawyers who support them make all the money they are after by doing this “in the public interest,” the entire airport should be declared a peanut free zone whenever you fly. We’ll even spend the money to clean the air filters no one will suffer any allergic reaction.  What we will suffer from is the effects of overbearing protectionism.   And of course businesses will pass the costs of lawsuits to the consumer.  In the case of airlines, this will cut into the already thin profit margins and hurt everyday people who need to travel.

This one will cost the rest of us.  It’s too bad her lawsuit is not worth peanuts.

 

 

I had a great conversation with a fellow last Friday who is making a documentary about lawsuit abuse. It was about as enjoyable a way to get through traffic on my way to the Westside of LA as I could imagine.  He has a good idea so if anyone has suggestions and resources for him please post them here.

We had a great chat and I am looking forward to meeting this fellow in person.  I want to support his efforts to keep awareness of how bad the problem of lawsuit abuse is as high as possible. 

If you have something to contribute please let me know.  My email address is lawsuitblog@yahoo.com.

Hope to hear from you soon!

Posted by: Hugh Hewitt  at 1:49 PM Today's decision by the California Supreme Court is yet another judicial puscht.  It is appalling.  Incredibly, a feverish will to power on the part of small numbers of judges is rapidly eroding a citizen's standing as the ultimate lawgiver.  Courts unbound by any sense of limits, by any sense of restraint, threaten the basic understanding that has long undergirded the Republic --that the laws  proceed from the open consent of the people, and that the ultimate laws, the federal and state constitutions, are documents of fixed meaning and structure, not merely window dressing on the rule of judicial elites or empty phrases waiting for elites to fill them with meaning.

Today's ruling framed the question before the California Supreme Court this way:

 

The question we must address is whether, under these circumstances, the failure to designate the official relationship of same-sex couples as marriage violates the California Constitution.

That was not in fact the central question.  The central question was whether the representative nature of the California state government, including its initiative provisions, would be upheld.

They were not.  The California Supreme Court asserted its ultimate power today in a way that is shameful and deeply destructive of the ability of a free people to govern themselves. 

A May 6, 2008 editorial in the LA Times shocked me: I could not believe I agreed with some of it.

Yea! Let’s tax the lawyers!  

Yep, that's what they said.  I love it.

Which do people like less, I wonder: lawyers or taxes?  This may be one of the only comparisons in which lawyers come out ahead! Talk about windfall profits, they know about that.  Holy moly, the City should immediately institute a tax on the money won by the lawyer of the Tennie Pearce case so we can get back some of the money our city blew on it.

Yea! Let’s tax the lawyers!

It is their windfall profits demagoguery come home, it is the class hatred stirred up by the Left coming back to haunt them.  I rant about Big Union and Big Lawyer (especially relative to the MSM and Left’s constant demonizing of Big Pharma and Big Tobacco), and if things are to be equal, as the left wants, then in this case we might actually agree on something.

The editorial, Service Taxes Just Might Work, discusses a service tax which in several other states routinely generates revenues from taxing sales of services such as car repairs and health club memberships. Service taxes are drawing new attention here because of the budget shortfall of $20 billion or more. Deep budget cuts certainly won't be enough. Finding enough savings from closing special-interest tax loopholes is not going to work. The state needs revenue.

I hate taxes, but in this case I agree with some in the governor's administration who are focusing on a sales tax on lawyers and accountants.  Taxing even some services the same way the state taxes goods would be a step toward a more rational and equitable system.

Yea! Let’s tax the lawyers!

They are also looking at taxes on tickets to sporting events, movies, amusement parks and golf courses.  But I ask you dear reader, where is most of the money and profit being made in this state?

Yea! Let’s tax the lawyers!

California's economy has boomed over the decades, with much of the growth in services. The state once relied on sales taxes to supply most of its revenue, but now taxes on sales of hard goods represent a diminishing slice of the money the state needs. As the state's service economy grows along with its population and its expenses, its tax revenue is left behind.

Here is where the Times actually made sense: “Applying the state's current 7.25% sales tax (8.25% in Los Angeles, higher in some other cities and counties) to services across the board makes sense. Imagine the fellow who runs a small car repair garage who juggles schedules to make a living. Will he have to hire an accountant to properly tax his customers?  The real question is whether or not he will bother? New paperwork requirements could sap strength from California's economy at just the time it needs a boost.  But one thing is certain: lawyers already have the number crunchers on staff to make sure the state gets its cut.

I wish this could be a ballot initiative as soon as possible. I can only imagine what our Lawyer-controlled legislature is going to do with this idea. 

Oh well, it sure sounded good.

 

An overweight prisoner in the United States is suing the authorities for not feeding him enough after he lost weight in jail.

Broderick Lloyd Laswell, who is awaiting trial for murder, dropped almost 100 lbs. after eight months inside the Arkansas prison.

He claims his vision has gone blurry while trying to exercise.

Laswell has filed a federal law suit complaining Benton County jail does not provide inmates with enough food.  The prison says the meals average 3,000 calories a day - more than the US recommended daily intake for adults.  According to the suit, Laswell weighed more than 400 lbs. when he was jailed in September. Police say he has been charged with fatally beating and stabbing a man, the Associated Press news agency reported. The suit also asks that the county be ordered to serve hot meals instead of cold food.

"On several occasions I have started to do some exercising and my vision went blurry and I felt like I was going to pass out," he wrote in his complaint. "About an hour after each meal my stomach starts to hurt and growl. I feel hungry again."

I’ll bet.  It must be hard to work out when you are overweight.  Wonder whose fault that is?

I know – it’s the prison system’s fault!  It’s the cops' fault!  It’s everyone else’s fault! And thanks to the lawyers, we should sue, sue, sue so the attorneys can take more money out of the pockets of the people!  I would love to know the name of the lawyer who jumped on this one to make a buck and get some media coverage.  Here is one attorney truly dedicated to the principal of "its not what is right, its what is legal."

The overweight prisoner complains about the lack of physical exercise: "The only reason we lost weight in here is because we are literally being starved to death."

Hmmm.  Maybe we should go "Midnight Express" on this guy and see what he thinks about a real lack of care.  Or maybe they should let him stay fat, feed him full of the lousy stuff he had been eating and let him lie around in sloth all the time so he can suffer from obesity.  Oh wait: then we will have to pay for his hospitalization which will include making him lose weight.   

Blurry vision while trying to exercise? I wonder if the tears cried by the family of his victim blurred their vision too. 

At least it sounds like the prison system is seeing clearly.

Martha Graybow of Reuters recently reported on Republican lawmakers who have demanded Congress hold a hearing on a legal industry scandal involving well-known plaintiffs' lawyers who admitted paying secret kickbacks to clients in corporate fraud lawsuits.  It is a perfect example of how Big Lawyer is hurting our nation and costing all of us money.

For those of you who were not paying attention to a few of the biggest legal stories of the year, a long-running federal probe has exposed the vile greed of the most successful class action lawyers in the land and led to the guilty pleas of attorneys Melvyn Weiss and William Lerach and other former lawyers at law firm Milberg LLP.  Weiss and Lerach became famous and fantastically wealthy making money from bringing shareholder lawsuits against large corporations, drawing scorn from pro-business advocates who said the cases were frivolous and a big distraction to companies. 

Guess what?  Those advocates were pretty much right. It turned out Weiss was paying witnesses off and breaking the law regularly to win cases and get rich, the results of which destroyed businesses and the lives of many people that were a part of them.

It always amazes me how people on the left ignore their own double standards – while we hear ranting against Big Pharma and Big Tobacco, we never hear about Big Union or Big Trial Bar.  (And I have to say the last time I took an aspirin and felt better I liked Big Pharma.)  A friend who is an attorney recently noted how she felt sorry for Weiss’ kids, who have been teased at school since the news of their father’s crimes made national news.  She wanted the authorities to take it easier on Weiss – maybe she should ask the folks whose lives were hurt when the company they worked for closed because of a bogus lawsuit filed by Milberg Wiess and their fellow criminals what they think.  By the way, she is a lawyer.

The Milberg scandal should be further investigated by the House Judiciary Committee to determine the extent of illegal payments to plaintiffs as initiated by House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio and Lamar Smith of Texas, the top Republican on the committee

 "The Republican-led Congress responded aggressively to the Enron and WorldCom scandals earlier this decade," the two lawmakers wrote in a letter to Rep. John Conyers, a Michigan Democrat who chairs the Judiciary Committee. "Now the Democrat-led Congress needs to do its job and examine the scandal at Milberg Weiss, which potentially has deeper and more far-reaching implications."

Weiss, the New York-based firm's co-founder, admitted to participating in the kickbacks scheme. He pleaded guilty on April 2 to racketeering and faces as much as 33 months in prison when he is sentenced.  Lerach, best known for winning billions in legal settlements for Enron investors, was sentenced in February to two years in prison. He left Milberg in 2004 to form his own San Diego-based law practice and has now retired from that firm. The Milberg firm has pleaded not guilty to criminal charges and is scheduled to go on trial in August.  Prosecutors said Weiss, Lerach and other defendants sought out clients with large stock portfolios, asking them to serve as plaintiffs when negative information surfaced about a company and then paying them a portion of the firm's legal fees without the knowledge of judges overseeing the cases.

Boehner and Smith said that Lerach was quoted in The Wall Street Journal as saying that the kickback payments were an "industry practice." Should such activity be widespread, then Congress has an obligation to take action, they wrote.  But while nearly three months have passed since Lerach was sentenced, Congress has yet to conduct even a single hearing to determine the extent to which crimes such as his are occurring in the rest of the industry.  

The Republicans are demanding a hearing by May 19.

Right – we are talking about the worst, do nothing, most condescending, totally complacent Congress in our nation’s history, currently held in the lowest esteem by the public since they started keeping track.

Good luck fellows.

I don't want to use this space to promote those who might be abusing the system for their personal gain, but a new on line legal service has been brought to my attention that so clearly exemplifies the drive by the greedy attorneys to endorse anything that creates new revenue streams -- even at the expense of further lowering their credibility among the public -- I have to mention it.

The new service is called SueEasy.  Oh great.  It runs through an Internet site that touts itself as a platform to "simplify the lawsuit process" and is drawing criticism from legal reformers who say the site is seeking to make the nation even more litigious than it is already.  The portal allows users to browse pending court actions online and join other consumers' cases. The site says it helps consumers get the "best in legal help with the least amount of hassles."  For users, the ultimate goal is to get the attention of a big-time lawyer to take their case. The site, registered to Webtronaut Innovations, is essentially a reverse directory for lawyers. Attorneys are charged a monthly fee to view potential cases in a variety of categories, including animal and dog bites, medical malpractice and slip and fall accidents.

Let the feeding frenzy continue!!

Walter Olson, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute Center for Legal Policy and editor of the great site Overlawyered.com, said "If this were a dating service, you'd have to wonder - whichever side of the dating you were on - what kind of dunce are they going to bring me?"

Walter is right.  There can be no doubt that this site is likely to attract potential litigants with weak cases.

Darren McKinney of the American Tort Reform Association, said the site embodies an attitude promulgated by the nation's trial lawyers "that runs against personal responsibility and seems to promote the notion that whatever negative happens in your life somebody else can be blamed and thus sued."

It is discouraging to those us to who promote Americans taking responsibility for their lives, including the good and the bad.  We also long for a time when the legal system was seen as something to nuture and respect, not exploit with the widest trawling net possible for profit at the expense of everyone but lawyers.

Thank you for visiting the Los Angeles Lawsuit Abuse Blog. 

I have launched this blog as a resource for citizens in Los Angeles County who have been victimized by lawsuit abuse or by attorneys seeking to benefit themselves at the expense of the citizens and the legal system.

If you are a small business owner or a citizen who has been the victim of lawsuit abuse, please tell us about it here.  By working together, we can raise awareness of this costly problem and in doing so reduce the amount of money being taken out of each of our pockets by smarmy legislators, greedy attorneys, irresponsible citizens and members of the medical profession who form the ugly quartet of lawsuit abuse in our state. 

Is a pair of pants really worth $54 million?  I would not have liked to be the next guy in line at the courthouse behind that schmoe. Anyone out there familiar with the Tennie Pierce case?  Did you know LAUSD spent $40 million in lawsuit costs and lawyers fees over the past two years?  Did you know the city of Los Angeles is now making homeowners pay for sidewalk repairs when they purchase a house, thereby passing on the liability for trip and fall lawsuits to each of us? (The city is now facing nearly $6 million in sidewalk slip and fall lawsuits by the way.)  Did you know lawsuit abuse costs each of us more than $800 annually? 

And that says nothing about Americans With Disabilities Act abuses -- how many restaurants, nail salons, dry cleaners and other small businesses have been harmed by the abuse of this important law.  Our trial lawyer controlled legislature is so lawsuit hungry they would not even allow small businesses time to fix violations -- they just said so ahead and start suing! 

Please feel free to communicate with me and others about your experiences with abusive lawsuits and those who support them.  By sharing your experiences with this community, we can collectively identify helpful resources, communicate with others who have had similar experiences and work together to raise awareness of the problem of lawsuit abuse in LA County. 

Working together we can save ourselves money!