
• Nevada man sues the Mormon church over a back injury he suffered performing baptisms for the dead. The church was negligent in not warning Daniel Dastrup that "the repetitive motion required for performing baptisms for the dead could cause serious damage to a person's back." Dastrup v. LDS Church
• Attorney says he was harassed by his boss at a Newport Beach, Calif., law firm because refused to attend a seminar "where he would be stripped naked, not allowed to leave, be required to discuss details of his sex life, handle a wooden dildo, and potentially allow other men to touch his genitals." Eggleston v. Bisnar/Chase
• Parents of a 10-year-old boy who witnessed a killer whale's fatal attack on a trainer sue Sea World Orlando for infliction of emotional distress. "Without question, it was reasonably foreseeable and in fact predictable that an attack such as this one by a killer whale with the tendencies of Tilikum was inevitable." Connell v. Sea World
• Denver judge dismisses Oklahoma City bomber Terry Nichols's civil rights claims against prison officials for denying him a high-fiber diet. Nichols v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
• Illinois teenager with cerebral palsy sues the Special Olympics for refusing to let her play basketball with the help of a service dog. Youngwith v. Special Olympics
• Montana judge sets aside a government decision removing protections for the northern Rocky Mountain gray wolf. The Endangered Species Act "was not intended to sow the dragon's teeth of strife or to plant the seeds of future conflicts that have given rise to this case." Defenders of Wildlife v. Salazar
• San Francisco judge dismisses a cereal consumer's false advertising suit. "[T]here is nothing in the packaging or marketing of Cap’n Crunch that would in any way deceive a reasonable consumer into believing that the cereal contains or derives nutritional value from real fruit." Werbel v. PepsiCo
• Iowa judge says a sheriff denied the applications of a father and son for concealed weapons permits in retaliation for their political activism. "This is a great reminder that the First Amendment protects the sole individual who may be a gadfly, kook, weirdo, nut job, whacko, and spook, with the same force of protection as folks with more majoritarian and popular views." Dorr v. Weber
• 5th Circuit rules that a school district violated the religious freedom of a Native American boy by requiring him to wear his long hair in a bun on top of his head or in a braid tucked into his shirt. The boy "has a sincere religious belief in wearing his hair uncut and in plain view." A.A. v. Needville Ind. Sch. Dist.

|
|
Legal Setbacks Final Straw for Killer of Five? |
|
 |
"Cookie" Thornton
On the same day Charles Lee “Cookie” Thornton killed five officials of a St. Louis suburb during a city council meeting, he suffered the second of two legal setbacks that may have pushed him over the edge.
In August, a St. Louis County judge had granted Kirkwood City Attorney John Hessel a restraining order against Thornton, who had feuded with city officials for years. The order barred Thornton from coming within 1,000 feet of Hessel's home or office.
Court records show the Missouri Court of Appeals dismissed Thornton's appeal on Feb. 7 for failure to follow procedural rules.
Later the same day, Thornton stormed a meeting of the Kirkwood City Council and shot four people to death -- Public Works Director Kenneth Yost, Police Officer Tom Ballman, and council members Michael Lynch and Connie Karr. He had earlier killed another police officer, William Biggs, outside City Hall.
Hessel was also at the meeting and believes he, Yost and Mayor Mike Swoboda were the three targets of the gunman. Kirkwood police killed Thornton after entering the city council chambers and exchanging gunfire with him.
Thornton had filed several lawsuits against the city, including a malicious prosecution case that also named Yost as a defendant. More recently, he alleged officials violated his free-speech rights when they had him arrested for disorderly conduct at two council meetings.
“By reason of defendant's actions,” he said in his pro se complaint,
Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer extreme hardship and actual and impending irreparable Humiliation in his Character of a Positive community role model, which now stands destroyed.
But in another setback, U.S. District Judge Catherine D. Perry granted the city's motion for summary judgment Jan. 28 –- 10 days before the shootings.
“Thornton does not have a first amendment right to engage in irrelevant debate and to voice repetitive, personal, virulent attacks against Kirkwood and its city officials,” she concluded in her ruling. Among other things, Thornton said the city had a “plantation-like mentality” and called the mayor a “jackass.”
Hessel obtained his restraining order after Thornton picketed in front of his downtown St. Louis law office and his Kirkwood home, holding a sign saying, “Want a lying lawyer? Call John Hessel.”
"I thought he was a little weird, but I always thought Cookie was a friendly enough guy," Hessel told the St. Louis Post Dispatch.
At one point during Thornton's Feb. 7 attack, he chased Hessel to the rear of the council chambers. “He was five feet away with both guns pointed at me,” Hessel recalled. "I said, 'Cookie, don't do this, don't kill me. I'm not going to let you do this.'”
Hessel then threw a chair at Thornton and escaped unharmed from the chambers, leaping over Yost's body. “I saw him stumble, I think he literally tripped over Ken,” he said.
The malicious prosecution case involved a series of citations that Yost had issued Thornton, a contractor, for violating city building codes. The Missouri Court of Appeals upheld a summary dismissal of the case in 2005.
|
UPDATE
City Attorney John Hessel discusses how he survived Thornton's rampage on ABAJournal.com.
|
By Matthew Heller 2/10/08
|
|
-
Court Raps Judge Over 'Moral' Views in Adoption Case
The Georgia Court of Appeals has rejected the reactionary views of a family court judge who ruled that a foster parent could not adopt a child because her out-of-wedlock relationship with a man was “immoral.”
Read more...
-
Off With His Head! Woman Sues 'Mad Hatter' Actor
Experimental theater clashes with premises liability law in the case of a Kentucky woman who claims she was injured while watching a performance of a circus-inspired play when one of the actors balanced his knee on her head.
Read more...
-
Charity Worker Accuses CEO of Hypnotic Seduction
A former charity worker may be pushing the limits of sexual harassment law by alleging that her boss required her to participate in “relaxation sessions” on his “magic couch” during which he hypnotized and molested her.
Read more...
-
Appeal is Expert's Latest Challenge to Judges
Expert witness Dr. David Egilman was previously successful in showing he had standing to appeal a judicial order in a case in which he was not a party — but that case may not help him in his latest challenge to a trial judge.
Read more...
-
Plaintiff's Expert Files Appeal in 'Popcorn Lung' Lawsuit
A controversial expert witness for plaintiffs has filed an unusual non-party appeal of a Washington state judge's decision finding his theory that snackers can contract lung disease from exposure to microwave popcorn is not scientifically sound.
Read more...
-
Philly School Sued Over Race Attack on Student's Mom
Taking civil rights law to what may be an extreme, an Asian-American woman is alleging a Philadelphia high school's tolerance of racism rendered her “helpless prey” to African-American students who attacked her when she picked her child up from the school.
Read more...
-
'McSteamy' Sex Tape Suit Cools off With Settlement
Acting couple Eric Dane and Rebecca Gayheart have dropped a $1 million lawsuit against Gawker.com for publishing a videotape featuring them in a nude threesome with a friend after the gossip website agreed to take down the much-viewed posting.
Read more...
|
McCourt v. McCourt Court: L.A. Superior Subject: Dodgers divorce
Pom Wonderful v. Welch Foods Court: USDC, C. Calif. Subject: False advertising
more
|
|
McCourt v. McCourt Date: 8/30/10 Court: L.A. Superior Hearing: Dodgers divorce trial
more
|
|
|