Recent Injury & Tort Law Decisions

In a far away land, an American corporation harms people. It could be a physical attack. Maybe it's just property destruction. The victims, cognizant of the rampant corruption within their own judicial and political systems, turn to the U.S. for relief.

They sue in a federal court under the Alien Tort Statute. Over 200 years old, it's a brief law:

The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.

So can the victims in the scenario we described above sue in the U.S.? Until today, popular federal opinion said yes.

Federal courts get the opportunity to resolve the great debates of our time. In 2001, the Nine were asked to answer the question, “What is golf?” This week, Judge Richard Posner and the Seventh Circuit — not ones to be outdone by Justice Scalia and the Supremes — addressed an equally important issue: Who decides if a  Catholic nun is really a “nun.”

(Hint: If you guessed the Catholic Church, you’re correct.)

If you're the guard on duty during a prison break, you should probably assume that you will be investigated.

The Seventh Circuit ruled this week that such investigations are objectively reasonable.

Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner’s civil procedure opinions often read like the textbook you wish you had in law school. Judge Posner has a knack for explaining procedure in a step-by-step process, noting why the court disposes of particular arguments.

Wednesday, Judge Posner explained in one of his textbook-style federal jurisdiction opinions why an allegation that the amount in controversy is $2 billion does not mean that the amount is $2 billion.

David Furry and Diane Nye claim that Ronald Williams — a substitute USPS letter carrier — hit their station wagon with his postal truck, causing “substantial injuries.”

Williams claims that he doesn’t know what the hell they’re talking about, and that the contact between the two vehicles can only be explained as “mystical.”

Turns out that’s a valid defense under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Not really, but kind of.

Beverly Stayart is annoyed that online search returns for her name abbreviated name -- "bev stayart" -- may lead to a search assist for "bev stayart levitra." Which could then take the searcher to a website for erectile dysfunction drugs. In fact, Bev -- a Wisconsin resident -- is so upset about her name being connected with ED meds that she sued the Internet (well, technically, a few search engines) for misappropriating her name. Several times. She has yet to win.

Stayart's problem in her latest appeal -- according to the Seventh Circuit -- is that she hasn't "articulated a set of facts that can plausibly lead to relief under Wisconsin's misappropriation laws" because the use of her name falls within the public interest and incidental use exceptions to the law. The bigger issue for Stayart is that the more she demands respect for her privacy rights, the more her name is associated ED drugs. That's just how the Internet works.

Juana Sanchez sued Prudential Pizza for sex discrimination, sexual harassment, and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The parties avoided a trial when Sanchez accepted Prudential Pizza's offer of judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 68.

Prudential Pizza's offer said that it included "all of Plaintiff's claims for relief," but it didn't specifically refer to costs or attorney fees. The district court concluded that the offer was unambiguous and included attorney fees. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, however, reversed that decision.

Does the attorney work product privilege protect communications between Justice Department lawyers who are assigned to provide legal assistance to federal agencies that have conflicting interests?

The Seventh Circuit ruled this week that communications in such situations can be privileged.

It seems that the Veluchamy family just can't win. Literally.

The family behind the Harvey-based Mutual Bank lost control of their bank to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in 2009. As a result of the FDIC-receivership, they also lost their priority claim to about $30 million dollars. And this week, the Veluchamys lost their Administrative Procedure Act (APA) appeal before the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

It’s a tough world out there for a singing telegram performer.

For a start, did you realize that singing telegrams still existed? And then there’s the fact that it’s nearly impossible for telegram performers to control the distribution of their performances in the Internet age. Everyone has a camera phone.

Last week, the Seventh Circuit added to the singing telegrammer’s already-heavy burden, ruling in an unpublished opinion that a singer simply couldn’t survive summary judgment on her copyright infringement and right of publicity claims after a client recorded her performance.