DOCSLIB.ORG

Lawsuit Ecosystem II New Trends, Targets and Players

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lawsuit Ecosystem II New Trends, Targets and Players Lawsuit Ecosystem II New Trends, Targets and Players DECEMBER 2014 © U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, December 2014. All rights reserved. This publication, or part thereof, may not be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform. Forward requests for permission to reprint to: Reprint Permission Office, U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, 1615 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20062-2000 (202.463.5724). Table of Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................i Litigation Trends Mass Tort & Product Liability Litigation ..................................................................................1 Class Action Litigation ..........................................................................................................15 Asbestos Litigation ...............................................................................................................25 Securities and M&A Litigation ..............................................................................................38 False Claims Act Litigation ...................................................................................................48 Patent Troll Litigation ...........................................................................................................58 Social Media at Work: Plaintiffs’ Bar and the NLRB Go Viral .................................................66 Energy Regulation through Litigation ....................................................................................76 Telephone Consumer Protection Act Litigation .....................................................................86 The Plaintiffs’ Lawyer Alliance With State Attorneys General ...........................................95 Special Features American Law Institute Projects Quietly Reshape Civil Litigation ........................................110 Defendants Fight Back .......................................................................................................117 Prepared for the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform by Victor E. Schwartz and Cary Silverman, Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP Contributing Authors The U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform appreciates the contributions of each of the attorneys who contributed their insight to the development of this report. MASS TORT & PRODUCT LIABILITY LITIGATION Cary Silverman & Virginia Knapp Dorrell Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP CLASS ACTION LITIGATION John H. Beisner & Jessica D. Miller Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP ASBESTOS LITIGATION Mark A. Behrens Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP James L. Stengel Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP SECURITIES AND M&A LITIGATION Andrew J. Pincus Mayer Brown LLP FALSE CLAIMS ACT LITIGATION Peter B. Hutt II Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP Cary Silverman Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP PATENT TROLL LITIGATION Phil Goldberg Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP SOCIAL MEDIA AT WORK Sara A. Begley, Joel S. Barras, Divonne Smoyer & Amanda D. Haverstick Reed Smith LLP ENERGY REGULATION THROUGH LITIGATION Phil Goldberg Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT LITIGATION Becca J. Wahlquist & Marjorie A. Witter Snell & Wilmer LLP THE PLAINTIFFS’ LAWYER ALLIANCE WITH STATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL Cary Silverman Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE PROJECTS QUIETLY RESHAPE CIVIL LITIGATION Victor E. Schwartz & Christopher E. Appel Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP DEFENDANTS FIGHT BACK Cary Silverman Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP Executive Summary What are the latest trends in American litigation? Where are opportunistic plaintiffs’ lawyers prospecting for lawsuit gold? How are some state attorneys general delegating unprecedented powers to private lawyers who are driven by profit, not the public interest? Are targeted businesses pushing back? These key questions, and more, are examined in The Lawsuit Ecosystem II: New Trends, Targets, and Players. Big-ticket litigation is a highly lucrative business. As the National Law Journal observed, in 2013, the 100 largest verdicts yielded more than $10 billion in recoveries, a sum the NLJ expects plaintiffs’ lawyers to equal or surpass this year.1 Creative plaintiffs’ lawyers are continually developing new theories and identifying new targets to increase their profits. This report, authored by a distinguished group of practitioners, explores the evolving lawsuit “ecosystem.” It considers how plaintiffs’ lawyers generate litigation and significant developments that will spur more lawsuits or rein in excessive liability. Key findings are highlighted below. Litigation Trends ADVERTISING FOR MASS TORT CLAIMANTS The business model for building mass tort litigation is extensive and complex: • Plaintiffs’ lawyers work with “lead generation” firms to advertise for prospective claimants, spending millions each month; • At the first sign of a problem with a product, plaintiffs’ lawyers begin recruitment efforts; • Potential claims are sold, traded, and bundled before a plaintiffs’ lawyer actually files them; and • Plaintiffs’ firms rush to file as many lawsuits as possible to gain a strategic advantage in future litigation. U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform I EXPANSIONS OF PRODUCT LIABILITY In three states, courts opened the door to new types of product liability lawsuits: • In Pennsylvania, the high court ruled that manufacturers may be liable for “negligent design” of a drug, even if it adequately warned of potential side effects; • In Alabama, the Supreme Court became the first high court to rule that a brand- name drug maker can be held liable for injuries caused by generic versions of the drug made by competitors; and • In California, a $1.15 billion verdict requires companies to pay to remediate lead paint they may not have sold on property they do not control. SANCTIONS FOR LOSS OF ELECTRONIC DATA Plaintiffs’ attorneys initiate discovery disputes to discredit a defendant in the judge’s eyes and, when possible, generate sanctions. • Given virtually unlimited amounts of electronic data, the risk of lost files, and opportunity for plaintiffs’ lawyers to cry foul, is high. • The largest verdict in a product liability case this year, $9 billion, stemmed from sanctions for failure to retain documents. • Proposed changes to the federal rules may help clarify document retention obligations. MIXED SIGNALS ON CLASS CERTIFICATION The battle over what does and does not constitute a certifiable class action continues. On one hand: • A class may include consumers who have experienced no problem with their purchases; and • Federal appellate courts are rarely granting immediate review of class certification rulings, thereby increasing the pressure on defendants to settle even meritless claims. But on the other hand: • “Ascertainability”—the need for plaintiffs’ lawyers to show they can accurately identify class members—has become increasingly prominent in class certification decisions; and • Some judges are scrutinizing class action settlements that generously compensate plaintiffs’ lawyers but provide little or no benefit to those they purportedly represent. II Lawsuit Ecosystem II ASBESTOS LITIGATION CONTINUES TO EVOLVE The outlook is mixed with respect to the seemingly endless parade of asbestos claims. On the plus side: • A federal bankruptcy judge has shed light on some of the more suspect tactics of plaintiffs’ lawyers, which might lead to additional evidence of abuse, and spur judicial action and legislative reform. On the minus side: • Court procedures in New York City were altered to favor asbestos plaintiffs; • In two major states, plaintiffs’ lawyers succeeded in subjecting employers to tort suits, circumventing workers’ compensation laws; and • Individuals with lung cancer—an illness often not related to asbestos—are being sought and recruited as a vast new pool of potential claimants. SECURITIES LITIGATION CONTINUES UNABATED Federal securities litigation harms investors while benefiting plaintiffs’ lawyers: • Shareholders lose $39 billion per year in wealth in order to collect $5 billion per year in settlement distributions; • Federal securities class action settlements resulted in $1.1 billion in attorneys’ fees, almost twice as much as the prior year; • “Frequent filers”—professional plaintiff investors—play a significant role in securities litigation; and • The U.S. Supreme Court maintained a court-created presumption that an alleged misstatement affects market price, which may result in even more complex and expensive securities litigation. A LAWSUIT FOR EVERY MAJOR DEAL Nearly every merger or acquisition results in multiple class action lawsuits within weeks of the announcement. • Businesses quickly pay this “litigation tax” as a cost of doing business in order to complete the deal; and • In three out of four settlements, shareholders do not receive a cent, but lawyers take home significant sums. U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform III QUI TAM LAWSUITS REACH NEW HEIGHTS Federal False Claims Act (FCA) lawsuits— known as qui tam actions—reached a new high in FY 2013, and continued at near record levels in FY 2014. • The healthcare and financial services industries bear the brunt of the litigation; • As the federal government assumes a greater role in healthcare, plaintiffs’ lawyers may develop new theories to bring FCA lawsuits; • Courts are considering cases that could further expand or constrain FCA liability, such as allowing “whistleblowers” to sue even when
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2012 Civil Rights Day Booklet
    Advancing Civil Rights Through Advocacy 9th Annual West Virginia Civil Rights Day Tuesday, February 28, 2012, 11:00 AM Norman L. Fagan West Virginia State Theater The WV Division of Cultural and History State Capitol Complex 1900 Kanawha Blvd. E. Charleston, WV 25305 Sponsored by: State of West Virginia Office of the Governor WV Division of Culture and History WV State University WV Human Rights Commission 2 Master of Ceremonies The Honorable Terry Walker, The Occasion Commissioner WV Human Rights Commission HONOREES’ ENTRANCE Greetings on behalf of Karl Gattlieb, Commissioner the Commission: WV Human Rights Commission Musical Selection: Randall Reid-Smith, Commissioner WV Department of Culture and History Invocation: Bishop David Stockton West Virginia State University Introduction of Governor: Rev. Wesley Dobbs, Commissioner WV Human Rights Commission Presentation of Proclamation, The Honorable Earl Ray Tomblin, Remarks & Honoree Photos Governor Presentation of Honoree Awards Michael J. Lewis, M.D., Ph.D Cabinet Secretary, DHHR Musical Selection: Randall Reid-Smith, Commissioner WV Department of Culture and History Presentation of Special Awards & Phyllis H. Carter, Sponsor Certificates: Acting Executive Director WV Human Rights Commission **Special Closing Musical Selection** LUNCHEON 12:00 NOON—1:30 PM 3 Advancing Civil Rights Through Advocacy West Virginia Civil Rights Day February 28, 2012 Governor Earl Ray Tomblin 4 PROCLAMATION by Governor Earl Ray Tomblin Whereas, equal rights and opportunities for all West Virginians are fundamental
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment and Garnishment in the Federal Courts
    Michigan Law Review Volume 59 Issue 3 1961 Attachment and Garnishment in the Federal Courts Brainerd Currie The University of Chicago Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr Part of the Civil Procedure Commons, Courts Commons, Jurisdiction Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation Brainerd Currie, Attachment and Garnishment in the Federal Courts, 59 MICH. L. REV. 337 (1961). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol59/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Michigan Law Review at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MICHIGAN LAW REVIEW Vol 59 JANUARY 1961 No. 3 ATTACHMENT AND GARNISHMENT IN THE FEDERAL COURTS Brainerd Currie* I. TllE PROBLEM AND ITS ORIGINS ERSONAL injuries allegedly caused by the negligent manufac­ P ture of safety fuses used in blasting operations in a coal mine were suffered by Raymond Davis, apparently a citizen of Arkansas. The manufacturer, Ensign-Bickford Company, was a Connecticut corporation that could not be personally served with process within Arkansas. But it happened that two foreign corporations, ame­ nable to process in the state, were indebted in substantial amounts to Ensign-Bickford Company. Accordingly, counsel for Davis, in­ voking the diversity jurisdiction, filed an action in the District Court for the Western District of Arkansas. Without issue of sum­ mons, the plaintiff, in conformity with Arkansas statutes, sued out orders of general attachment, for notice by publication, and for warning the defendant.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Hellholes Report
    “ Since the Supreme Court of the United States is the highest authority as concerns federal constitutional questions such as the present one, I am unable to join an opinion of a state court that does not abide by its latest pronouncement.” – Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Chief Justice Thomas Saylor in his dissenting opinion in Hammons v. Ethicon (October 21, 2020). “ The current construction of PAGA by California courts [which have their own constitutional infirmities] gives rise to the following unconstitutional framework: valid and binding arbitration agreements are rendered unenforceable; private contingency-fee attorneys are permitted to litigate on behalf of the state without oversight or coordination with any state official; private attorneys are allowed to negotiate settlements that enrich themselves at the expense of everyone but themselves.” – California Business & Industry Alliance in its suit against the State of California alleging a lack of governmental oversight of PAGA litigation. “ The average New Yorker feels the pain too. Nuclear verdicts (and routinely excessive verdicts) drive insurers from the market and increase premiums. The twin pressures of decreasing competition and increased insurance costs are ultimately passed through to the consumer. This is the same consumer and taxpayer who was leaving New York at a higher rate than any of the 50 states even before COVID-19.” – The New York Law Journal writing about the economic impact of New York’s legal climate and the rise in excessive verdicts. “ Welcome to St. Louis, the new hot spot for litigation tourists. The city’s circuit court is known for fast trials and big awards.” – Margaret Cronin Fisk, Bloomberg News “ I talk to business owners and lobbyists who represent business owners and they would not come here for anything… I’m sorry I get flustered when I hear people say we are bringing in money.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Supreme Court of the United States
    No. In the Supreme Court of the United States LANELL WILLIAMS-YULEE, Petitioner, v. THE FLORIDA BAR, Respondent. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI ERNEST J. MYERS ANDREW J. PINCUS LEE W. MARCUS CHARLES A. ROTHFELD Marcus & Myers, P.A. MICHAEL B. KIMBERLY 1515 Park Center Drive Counsel of Record Suite 2G PAUL W. HUGHES Orlando, FL 32835 Mayer Brown LLP (407) 447-2550 1999 K Street NW Washington, DC 20006 EUGENE R. FIDELL (202) 263-3127 Yale Law School mkimberly@ Supreme Court Clinic mayerbrown.com 127 Wall Street New Haven, CT 06511 (203) 432-4992 Counsel for Petitioner QUESTION PRESENTED Whether a rule of judicial conduct that prohibits candidates for judicial office from personally solicit- ing campaign funds violates the First Amendment. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Question Presented ..................................................... i Table of Authorities................................................... iii Opinions Below............................................................1 Jurisdiction..................................................................1 Constitutional Amendment and Canon of Conduct Involved.........................................1 Statement ....................................................................2 A. Factual background..........................................3 B. Procedural background ....................................3 Reasons for Granting the Petition..............................6 A. There is a deep and acknowledged conflict
    [Show full text]
  • GINAL Fsupr—Rne Cou
    Jle GINAL FSupr—rne CoU. U S emFILED No. LC) NOV1U21 OFFICE Of EID" Before The Supreme Court of The United States James E. Whitney Petitioner V. Cindy Glover, et al. Respondent On a petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Case no. 18-1227 Petition for Writ of Certiorari James E. Whitney,ProSe Sui Juris In Propria Persona 163817 P.O.Box 600 Grady, Arkansas 71644-0600 RECEIVED NOV 192018 OFFICE OF THE CLERK SUPREME COURT, U.S. Preface Pay heed and hear me, be still and I will speak; If you have what to say, answer me; But if not, listen to me; Be still and I will teach you wisdom. But where does wisdom come? Where is the source of understanding? See! Fear of the Lord is wisdom; to shun Evil is understanding; no man can set a value on the for it is the breath of El Shaddai from which they come. It is not the aged who are wise, nor the elders who understand how to judge. As long as there is life in me, and God's breath is in mynostrils, my lips will speak no wrong, nor my tongue utter deceit. Until I die I will maintain my integrity, I persist in my righteousness and I will not yield; I shall be free of reproach as long as I live. I would not temper my speech for anyone's sake nor show regards for any man, for I do not know how to temper my speech- my maker would soon carry me off.
    [Show full text]
  • Arkansas Public Health Law Bench Book Was Provided by the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, William H
    Arkansas Public Health Bench Book Page | 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Sarah Elizabeth Pitman, Editor. Funding for the completion of the Arkansas Public Health Law Bench Book was provided by the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, William H. Bowen School of Law and the Arkansas Center for Health Improvement. The materials contained in the Bench Book were compiled by the Health Law Committee of the Arkansas Bar Association. Special thanks to the following Members: Elizabeth Andreoli, J.D.; Elisa White, J.D.; Amy Dunn Johnson, J.D.; Joe Volpe, J.D.; Brandon Harrison, J.D.; Kathy DiMaggio, J.D.; Kristy Moody, J.D.; Rhonda Wood, J.D.; Carol Roddy, J.D.; Jack McNulty, J.D.; Shannon Fant, J.D.; Diane Mackey, J.D.; J. Lineé Ophof. This Bench Book could not have been completed without the support of the Arkansas Department of Health, in particular the Center for Health Protection, Preparedness, and Response Branch, William Mason, M.D., Branch Chief. Special thanks to the following individuals who contributed comments and expertise to this project: Rick Hogan, J.D., M.P.H.; Diane Mackey, J.D.; Karen Kim, Ph.D.; Jay Gandy, Ph.D.; Kevin Ryan, J.D., M.A., R.N. Please send any comments, suggestions, or corrections to: Rick Hogan General Counsel Arkansas Department of Health 4815 West Markham, Slot H-31 Little Rock, AR 72205-3867 Office (501)661-2252, Fax (501)661-2357 Disclaimer: This Bench Book is intended to be a resource and guide for judges sitting on the bench and those practicing in public health. It is not intended to serve as legal advice in place of a qualified attorney.
    [Show full text]
  • Alabama at a Glance
    ALABAMA ALABAMA AT A GLANCE ****************************** PRESIDENTIAL ****************************** Date Primaries: Tuesday, June 1 Polls Open/Close Must be open at least from 10am(ET) to 8pm (ET). Polls may open earlier or close later depending on local jurisdiction. Delegates/Method Republican Democratic 48: 27 at-large; 21 by CD Pledged: 54: 19 at-large; 35 by CD. Unpledged: 8: including 5 DNC members, and 2 members of Congress. Total: 62 Who Can Vote Open. Any voter can participate in either primary. Registered Voters 2,356,423 as of 11/02, no party registration ******************************* PAST RESULTS ****************************** Democratic Primary Gore 214,541 77%, LaRouche 15,465 6% Other 48,521 17% June 6, 2000 Turnout 278,527 Republican Primary Bush 171,077 84%, Keyes 23,394 12% Uncommitted 8,608 4% June 6, 2000 Turnout 203,079 Gen Election 2000 Bush 941,173 57%, Gore 692,611 41% Nader 18,323 1% Other 14,165, Turnout 1,666,272 Republican Primary Dole 160,097 76%, Buchanan 33,409 16%, Keyes 7,354 3%, June 4, 1996 Other 11,073 5%, Turnout 211,933 Gen Election 1996 Dole 769,044 50.1%, Clinton 662,165 43.2%, Perot 92,149 6.0%, Other 10,991, Turnout 1,534,349 1 ALABAMA ********************** CBS NEWS EXIT POLL RESULTS *********************** 6/2/92 Dem Prim Brown Clinton Uncm Total 7% 68 20 Male (49%) 9% 66 21 Female (51%) 6% 70 20 Lib (27%) 9% 76 13 Mod (48%) 7% 70 20 Cons (26%) 4% 56 31 18-29 (13%) 10% 70 16 30-44 (29%) 10% 61 24 45-59 (29%) 6% 69 21 60+ (30%) 4% 74 19 White (76%) 7% 63 24 Black (23%) 5% 86 8 Union (26%)
    [Show full text]
  • A National Call to Action
    A National Call to Action Access to Justice for Limited English Proficient Litigants: Creating Solutions to Language Barriers in State Courts July 2013 For further information contact: Konstantina Vagenas, Director/Chief Counsel Language and Access to Justice Initiatives National Center for State Courts 2425 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 350 Arlington, VA 22201-3326 [email protected] Additional Resources can be found at: www.ncsc.org Copyright 2013 National Center for State Courts 300 Newport Avenue Williamsburg, VA 23185-4147 ISBN 978-0-89656-287-5 This document has been prepared with support from a State Justice Institute grant. The points of view and opinions offered in this call to action are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official policies or position of the State Justice Institute or the National Center for State Courts. Table of Contents Preface and Acknowledgments i Executive Summary ii Introduction iv Chapter 1: Pre-Summit Assessment 1 Chapter 2: The Summit 11 Plenary Sessions 12 Workshops 13 Team Exercises: Identifying Priorities and Developing Action Plans 16 Chapter 3: Action Steps: A Road Map to a Successful Language Access Program 17 Step 1: Identifying the Need for Language Assistance 19 Step 2: Establishing and Maintaining Oversight 22 Step 3: Implementing Monitoring Procedures 25 Step 4: Training and Educating Court Staff and Stakeholders 27 Step 5: Training and Certifying Interpreters 30 Step 6: Enhancing Collaboration and Information Sharing 33 Step 7: Utilizing Remote Interpreting Technology 35 Step 8: Ensuring Compliance with Legal Requirements 38 Step 9: Exploring Strategies to Obtain Funding 40 Appendix A: Summit Agenda 44 Appendix B: List of Summit Attendees/State Delegations 50 Preface and Acknowledgments Our American system of justice cannot function if it is not designed to adequately address the constitutional rights of a very large and ever-growing portion of its population, namely litigants with limited English proficiency (LEP).
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Hellholes 2012/13
    JUDICIALHELLHOLES® 2012/13 JUDICIAL JUDICIAL HELL H OLES 2012 OLES / 13 1 “ What I call the ‘magic jurisdiction,’ [is] where the judiciary is elected with verdict money. The trial lawyers have established relationships with the judges … and it’s almost impossible to get a fair trial if you’re a defendant in some of these places. … Any lawyer fresh out of law school can walk in there and win the case, so it doesn’t matter what the evidence or law is.” — Richard “Dickie” Scruggs, legendary Mississippi trial lawyer who built an empire of influence suing tobacco companies, HMOs and asbestos-related companies, but who has since been disbarred and sentenced to federal prison after pleading guilty to conspiracy in an attempt to bribe a judge. CONTENTS PREFACE . 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . 3 JUDICIAL HELLHOLES . 7 #1 California . 7 #2 West Virginia . 10 #3 Madison County, Illinois . 12 #4 New York City and Albany, New York . 15 #5 Baltimore, Maryland . 19 WATCH LIST . 21 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania . 21 South Florida . 23 Cook County, Illinois . 25 New Jersey . 27 Nevada . 29 Louisiana . 30 DISHONORABLE MENTIONS . 33 Missouri Supreme Court Strikes down Noneconomic Damages Limit . 33 Washington Supreme Court Hits Protective Equipment Maker with Liability . 33 POINTS OF LIGHT . 35 IN THE COURTS California Supreme Court Finds Companies Not Liable for Products of Others Attached to Theirs after Sale . 35 Illinois Supreme Court Finds that Landowners Are Not Liable to Trespassers Who Ignore Obvious Dangers . 35 Kansas Supreme Court Rejects Attempt to Nullify Limit on Pain & Suffering Damages . 36 Mississippi Supreme Court Reins in Attorney General’s Alliance with Plaintiffs’ Lawyers .
    [Show full text]
  • Boilermakers Help Build World's Largest Solar Thermal Facility
    REPOTHE RTER The official publication of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers & Helpers, AFL-CIO/CLC JUL- SEP 2012 Volume 51 | Number 3 Boilermakers help build world’s largest solar thermal facility L-92 leads critical work at innovative Ivanpah Valley project RISING FROM THE floor of California’s Mojave Desert, about 40 miles southwest of Las Vegas, the Ivanpah Solar Electric Gener- ating System’s three 459-foot towers resemble missile launch pads. They are the most visible features of a 3,600-acre development that will use focused sunlight to turn water to steam and steam to electricity. The $2.2 billion, 392-MW project is being built by BrightSource Energy and will pro- vide power to PG&E and Southern California Edison. The U.S. Department of Energy has guaranteed about $1.4 billion for the project. Boilermakers from Local 92 (Los Ange- les) and sister locals, along with other crafts, are building the SEGS under a project labor agreement between Bechtel and the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California and the Building & Construction Trades Council of San Bernardino and River- side Counties. Scheduled for completion in 2013, the proj- ect reached the half-way mark this summer, see IVANPAH, PG. 12 . 1023 NONPROFIT ORG. NONPROFIT PAID POSTAGE U.S. SOUTHERN, MD PERMIT NO MAIN steWARD BOB FURNISH stands below the unit 1 tower at Ivanpah. The boiler sits atop the tower and is coated with a black, heat-absorbing material. Chris Farina Photography INSIDE THIS ISSUE Rally Industrial Sector meets targets 2 Ryan 5 EPORTER R , SUITE 565 SUITE , GET OUT AND VOTE! VENUE 9 A CITY, 66101 KS CITY, Delisle first female S A S in national 53 STATE STATE 53 KAN THE BOILERMAKER BOILERMAKER THE 7 apprentice competition THE BOILERMAKER REPORTER 2 JU L- SEP 2012 HEADLINE NEWS ISO conference keys on global labor issues, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • West Virginia As a Judicial Hellhole: Why Businesses Fear Litigating in State Courts
    Volume 111 Issue 3 Article 8 April 2009 West Virginia as a Judicial Hellhole: Why Businesses Fear Litigating in State Courts Victor E. Schwartz Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P. Sherman Joyce American Tort Reform Association Cary Silverman Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P. Follow this and additional works at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/wvlr Part of the Torts Commons Recommended Citation Victor E. Schwartz, Sherman Joyce & Cary Silverman, West Virginia as a Judicial Hellhole: Why Businesses Fear Litigating in State Courts, 111 W. Va. L. Rev. (2009). Available at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/wvlr/vol111/iss3/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the WVU College of Law at The Research Repository @ WVU. It has been accepted for inclusion in West Virginia Law Review by an authorized editor of The Research Repository @ WVU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Schwartz et al.: West Virginia as a Judicial Hellhole: Why Businesses Fear Litigat WEST VIRGINIA AS A JUDICIAL HELLHOLE: WHY BUSINESSES FEAR LITIGATING IN STATE COURTS Victor E. Schwartz* ** Sherman Joyce Cary Silverman*** I. WHAT THE JUDICIAL HELLHOLES REPORT Is AND Is NOT ................. 758 II. FAILURES OF WEST VIRGINIA'S CIVIL JUSTICE SYSTEM .................... 760 A. Lack of Appellate Review ....................................................... 760 B. Home Court Advantage ......................................................... 764 C. ProceduralUnfairness ........................................................... 766 1. Mass
    [Show full text]
  • Bicentennial Celebration of the U.S. Attorneys
    Bicentennial Celebration of the United States Attorneys 1789 - 1989 "The United States Attorney is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor– indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one." QUOTED FROM STATEMENT OF MR. JUSTICE SUTHERLAND, BERGER V. UNITED STATES, 295 U. S. 88 (1935) INTRODUCTION In this, the Bicentennial Year of the United States Constitution, the people of America find cause to celebrate the principles formulated at the inception of the nation Alexis de Tocqueville called, “The Great Experiment.” The experiment has worked, and the survival of the Constitution is proof of that. But with the celebration of the Constitution must also come the commemoration of those sharing responsibility for the realization of those noble principles in the lives of the American people, those commissioned throughout our nation’s history as United States Attorneys.
    [Show full text]