Despite egregious facts — the surgeon was a narcotics addict and the patient suffered severe brain damage after nearly bleeding to death during surgery for a herniated disc — the appellate court found plaintiff had not established that the hospital was “consciously indifferent” in allowing the surgeon to continue to perform operations, according to this.
News & Politics
Last week, the California State Court of Appeal held that the law allowing those forced to work during World War II to sue under a California statute was constitutional, and the lawsuits could go forward (discussed below). But today, the Ninth Circuit disagreed, holding the statute unconstitutional in this opinion.
Some allegedly mobbed-up guys and their lawyers are certainly making him look like the latter these days. And he ain’t talkin’. CNN reports it here.
You gotta love the law. The fight was over import tarriffs, which tax “dolls” (human) more heavily than “toys” (non-human). As the Wall Street Journal reports here, some comic book fans are howling in protest over the ruling denying their heroes “human” status. But the Judge ain’t budging, and it appears that she did her homework: “Judge Barzilay, through a spokesman, said that she would let her 32-page decision speak for itself. [S]he described in her ruling how she subjected many of the figures to ‘comprehensive examinations.’ At times, that included ‘the need to remove the clothes of the figure.'”
The 25 year-old Pakistani college dropout, who investigators say is “brilliant,” used an incredibly elaborate scheme involving fake names, mail drops, and stolen credit card numbers to steal some $3 million worth of brand new PC equipment from US companies. He then resold the loot as legitimate merchandise through his Karachi business. After months of investigation, he was finally caught after being tracked down through his ISP. The International Herald Tribune reports the details here.
Here’s an interesting article about the administration’s position in the University of Michigan case, and whether its brief is likely to have an effect on the Supreme Court’s ruling. UPDATE: Oral arguments in the case have been set for April Fools Day, 4/1/03.
Here’s an article by Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick about the Justices’ antics at the recent oral argument in the case about whether the States can be sued under the FMLA, or whether the 11th amendment bars such suits (Nevada Dept. of Human Resources v. Hibbs). Read more about the case below.
In law school, we sometimes played a game called “asshole bingo.” We’d make up cards with the pictures of the biggest blowhards in class – the people who always had to raise their hands and kiss the professor’s ass – arranged randomly in a grid, and cross them off as each spoke up, hoping for “BINGO!” The current speculation about the next Supreme Court Justice somehow has a similar feel . . . .