With the Dow Jones hitting new lows and many a company struggling to keep stock prices up, corporate types are challenged to get their businesses back in good shape.

Some do this by firing replacing those at the top. Some do it by streamlining (e.g. layoffs) and cutting back on expenses. Some do it by threatening the lives of executive officers and their families if they don't keep quiet about the company's troubled finances...

Well, at least one Canadian board chairman chose that last questionable tactic. From Courthouse News:

"Beginning in or around June or July 2007, and contrary to the corporation's public reporting, Garda World Security Corporation was apparently experiencing serious financial problems. The operating results with respect to the corporation's cash logistics business were apparently so at variance with its public reporting that defendant Stephan Cretier, the Chairman of the Board of Garda World Security Corporation and its largest individual shareholder, threatened Richard Irvin and other top executives of the company at a meeting in late November 2007, that if any of them leaked the true facts, he would use the corporation's security operatives to investigate the leak and would kill any executive and the family of any executive found responsible for the leak," the complaint states.

"As a result of this death threat, plaintiffs Richard R. Irvin and his wife ... have lived in fear for their safety and the safety of their family, and seek compensatory, emotional distress and punitive damages incurred as a result of this threat."

Unlike the crazy, homeless man in Tampa who will be facing jail time for threatening the President, it sounds like Cretier had seriously thought out his chilling death threat. We're more media than business types at ATL, but we think death threats aren't the best tool to use in negotiations.

According to Cretier's bio, he's a very successful entrepreneur: "Being a true visionary, he takes risks, seizes opportunities within the security field and motivates the people around him to outdo themselves." ...Or he'll have them killed?

Board Chairman Threatened To Kill Execs If They Talked About Finances, VP Says [Courthouse News Service]

Sometimes it seems like Duke University is as polarizing as Hillary Clinton. People love it or people hate it. Even before the lacrosse scandal. If the hate comes from jealousy over Duke being a top ten school with one of the best NCAA basketball programs in the country (in past years), perhaps people should start shifting their hate over to Stanford. Duke didn't even make it to the Sweet Sixteen this year.

We are not the only ones making the Duke inferiority argument. Duke's legal team basically used the "Duke football sucks" argument to win a breach of contract lawsuit brought by the University of Louisville. From the Courier-Journal:

U of L sued Duke for $450,000 -- or a series with another Atlantic Coast Conference opponent -- after the Blue Devils backed out of a four-game football contract with three dates remaining.

The contract called for a penalty of $150,000 per game if a date with a "team of similar stature" could not be arranged.

Duke's lawyers argued the Blue Devils, which have a record of 6-45 over the past five seasons, were so bad that any team would be a suitable replacement.

Judge Shepherd agreed in his summary: "At oral argument, Duke (with a candor perhaps more attributable to good legal strategy than to institutional modesty) persuasively asserted that this is a threshold that could not be any lower. Duke's argument on this point cannot be reasonably disputed by Louisville."

Duke football may indeed suck, but Duke's lawyers are pretty savvy.

Judge agrees: Duke football as bad as it gets [Courier-Journal via AOL Fanhouse]

According to Sisqo, thongs are "what the guys talk about," "the finer things in life."

Macrida Patterson disagrees. She thinks thongs are downright dangerous, and she's filed a very un-sexy product liability suit against Victoria's Secret.

From the Smoking Gun:

As she was attempting to put on a Victoria's Secret thong, a Los Angeles woman claims that a decorative metallic piece flew off the garment and struck her in the eye, causing injuries and a new product liability lawsuit against the underwear giant. Macrida Patterson, 52, alleges that she was hurt last May by a defective "low-rise v-string" from the Victoria's Secret "Sexy Little Thing" line, according to a lawsuit filed last week in Los Angeles Superior Court.

Usually we'd write a salacious post about such material. But all we can see in our mind's eye is a big woman trying to squeeze into an itty-bitty thong, and a piece of metal taking flight due to the stress.

Perhaps Patterson has "dumps like a truck truck truck" (whatever that means), and should have stuck to Victoria Secret's "Sexy Little Larger Things."

P.S. Is the Victoria's Secret legal department hiring? Between thong lawsuits and bra design litigation, they must be pretty busy over there.

Dinged By A G-String? [Smoking Gun]

Parents of an Ohio eighth grader are suing their son's teacher, principal, and school superintendent, as well as the Mt. Vernon City School District. Apparently the teacher is among the one in eight biology teachers who don't believe in evolution, and he espouses his religious beliefs in class. And oh yeah, he burned a cross into their son's arm!

From the Courthouse News Service:

The John Does claim Freshwater has unconstitutionally taught his religious beliefs in his science classes for more than a decade. They claim that in 2003 Freshwater sought, and was denied permission, to teach "intelligent design," but does it anyway. They claim his classroom is festooned with Biblical posters, that he tells his students that "although he is forced to teach from the textbooks, the teachings are wrong or not proven according to the Bible."

The complaint [PDF] states: "On Dec. 6, 2007, Mr. Freshwater burned a cross into James Doe's arm using an electric device manufactured by Electro-Technic Products, Inc., Model BD-10A. The manufacturer of Model BD-10A warns that the electric device has a high voltage output that should never be used to touch human skin. ... Mr. Freshwater applied the electric device to the arm of at least one other eighth grade student on Dec. 6, 2007. The area burned with Model BD-10A resulted in an easily identifiable cross consisting of red welts with blistering, swelling and blanching in the surrounding area...

The complaint also states that Freshwater, as adviser of the school's Fellowship of Christian Athletes, claimed to drive Satan out of a speaker at a club meeting, told club members that "they are saved, whereas the other students playing on the playground are going to Hell," distributed Bibles at school, gave "extra credit" to students who did work on "intelligent design," and that school administrators knew all this but failed to discipline him for it.

Last time we checked, exorcising demons from your students wasn't part of the No Child Left Behind Act.

Eighth Grader Says Teacher Burned A Cross Into His Flesh [Courthouse News]

This lawsuit seems distinctly un-Christian. Matthew Lincoln is suing his Tennessee church for $2.5 million, for injuries sustained during a service. What happened to turning the other cheek?

From the Smoking Gun:

Last June, Matthew Lincoln was attending an evening service at his nondenominational Tennessee church when he approached the altar where a visiting minister was offering individual prayers for parishioners. Assigned "catchers" were present on the altar in case congregants fainted, fell, or otherwise lost control.

When the minister, Robert Lavala, slightly touched his forehead, the Knoxville-area man "received the spirit and fell backwards." Except nobody was there to catch him, Lincoln charges in a $2.5 million lawsuit filed yesterday against Lakewind Church and its pastors. Lincoln, 58, claims that he fell backwards, striking his head against the "carpet-covered cement floor."

Overlawyered has covered quite a few of these types of lawsuits. Perhaps the plaintiffs should band together and file a class action against the Big Guy Upstairs, for negligently inflicting them with the spirit.

Man Falls After Receiving Spirit, Sues [Smoking Gun]
Slain in the Spirit: Tennessee case [Overlawyered]

We've always had pleasant experiences with employees at Starbucks. But we only order simple drinks like iced coffee, so our interactions tend to be limited. After an extended encounter with a Starbucks manager, a Portland woman had a bit of a coffee tantrum. Prosecutors tried her for misdemeanor harassment, but she's been found not guilty.

From the Oregonian:

The prosecutor turned toward the woman on the witness stand and began her interrogation: Is it or is it not true that you flung the iced venti mocha with extra hazelnut and caramel at the defendant out of anger?

No, answered the woman.

And isn't it true that you also lobbed a capful of whipped cream toward another employee?

No, the woman insisted once again.

And so went the criminal trial of a Starbucks customer accused of throwing a $4 drink onto a manager during an argument last September.

Mocha, hazelnut, and caramel? That's getting a little crazy.

The trial of 38-year-old Latasha Curry included accusations of racism, a cover-up, and bad coffee. Kash must disclose that she is a Starbucks shareholder before admitting that the coffee is just too bitter sometimes. But it's the jet fuel that gets us through the day.

It all began last fall when Curry called a Starbucks in Southeast Portland to complain about the bitter taste of the iced mocha she had just bought there.

An employee on the other end of the line offered her a free replacement, and when Curry stopped by the store two days later to pick it up, a store manager accused her of running a scam. The manager stood soaking in caffeinated beverage moments later....

On Thursday, Starbucks released a statement after a spokeswoman declined to comment about the case: "Providing great customer service is part of (the company's) commitment and if a drink isn't perfect, we want customers to let us know and we'll make it right."

Or you can pour it on our employees.

Dispute over spilled Starbucks mocha ends up in Portland court [Oregonian]

When you go on a vacation and it doesn't turn out well, it'd be nice to have it reimbursed. New York attorney Richard Roth, whose vacation to Argentina was ruined, has filed a suit against Delta Airlines to get them to reimburse him -- and then some. From Reuters:

A New York lawyer is suing Delta Air Lines for $1 million, saying his family vacation turned into a nightmare after they were stranded in an airport for days and treated disdainfully by airline employees. Richard Roth, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of himself and his mother, said he planned the Christmas 2007 trip to Buenos Aires to celebrate his mother's 80th birthday. She had grown up in the city, but had not returned in years, he said.

Instead, Roth, his two teenage children, his wife and mother spent three days in airports, went days without their luggage, were treated rudely by airline employees and were forced to spend $21,000 on unused hotel rooms in Argentina, replacement clothes, and other costs.

"Through its gross negligence, malfeasance and absolute incompetence, Mr. Roth holds Delta responsible for ruining his vacation," said the lawsuit, filed in New York state court.

One million bucks is a ridiculous demand, but who knows what a jury might do? The general consensus among everyone we know: airlines suck.

Aviation litigation has been all the rage this year. Here's a legal round-up on why we hate flying:

Fellow passengers using your hair to join the mile-high club (Lawsuit of the Day: Overly Friendly Skies)

Being demoted from coach to "turd class" (Lawsuit of the Day: Forced to Fly 'Toilet-Class')

Not being able to wear a fake bomb on your shirt (From the Department of Dubious Defenses: Shouting Fire in a Crowded... Airport?)

Being really annoyed because of the security lines and delays but not being able to hit anybody. Unless you're Naomi Campbell. (Supermodel Campbell charged over 'air rage')

Lawyer sues Delta for ruining family vacation [Reuters]
Supermodel Campbell charged over 'air rage' [Breitbart]

Legal Pad (a Cal Law blog) has a link to this amazing complaint [PDF] filed by paralegal Jason Herrera against Weil, Gotshal & Manges.

Herrera's complaint -- "for discrimination, retaliation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress and fraud" -- reads like a reality tv show pitch about the lives of paralegals. Herrera has been a paralegal in Weil's Silicon Valley office since 2004. In his complaint, he talks about:

From Legal Pad:

(For those who don't know, Matt Powers is one of the most feared, respected and successful patent litigators in the country.)

(Also for those of you don't know, the ever-useful urban dictionary defines "pimp hand" as "the hand used to smack your ho's around," but has no definition for "mojo hand")...

Reached Friday at Weil Gotshal where he still works, Herrera told Legal Pad he sued because he was out of options for resolving the problems. He has yet to serve the firm, and said he was contemplating Friday just how to do it.

Wikipedia says the mojo hand is a kind of magic charm. We still don't know what a mojo hand is, but we want one!

As a former paralegal, Kash was most amused by Herrera's complaint that he was given "repetitive, unchallenging and un-enriching tasks." Welcome to being a paralegal!

Lawyer's 'Pimp Hand' Mojos Up A Staffer's Suit? [Legal Pad]
Complaint: Herrera v. Weil, Gotshal & Manges [PDF]

Well, if the name is "Wolfgang" and you're in the restaurant business, maybe a lawsuit. Celebrity chef Wolfgang Puck, owner of the famous Spago restaurant in Beverly Hills, is taking legal action against a new neighbor.

From TMZ.com:

Wolfgang Puck is filing a lawsuit, claiming another Wolfgang has screwed him over....

Puck claims a guy named Wolfgang Zwiener opened a rival restaurant, Wolfgang's Steakhouse, just blocks from Spago in Bev Hills. According to the suit, one of the owner's of Wolfgang Steakhouse had a license to use the Spago trademark, but that expired last year.

In L.A., Wolfgang Zwiener may be just "some guy." But in New York, he's an esteemed veteran of the legendary Peter Luger steakhouse (popular for summer associate outings), who has now embarked upon his own restaurant career.

Wolfgang Puck's lawsuit, which seeks injunctive relief, claims trademark infringement and unfair competition. The TMZ.com editors seem unsympathetic:

A frustrated Puck says, "The most common reaction is, 'It says Wolfgang's Steakhouse and you are Wolfgang." We're thinking Mozart might have one up on him. Dude, you make pizzas.

Will the courts be more supportive? If Puck's first name were more common -- say, "John" or "Bill," with the competitor calling itself "John's Steakhouse" or "Bill's Place" -- then his claim might not satisfy the distinctiveness requirement of trademark law. But with a name as unusual as "Wolfgang" -- not as unusual as Omarosa, to be sure, but certainly uncommon -- maybe he has a better shot. "Wolfgang" is not in the top 1000 baby names in the United States (although it does crack the top 3000 in Belgium).

We're not experts in this area, so we'll stop rambling. Any IP lawyers care to weigh in?

Wolfgang to Wolfgang -- Puck You [TMZ.com]

If we hadn't already bestowed our Lawsuit of the Day prize, this bizarre tale might have taken the cake.

Meet Donna Campbell (pictured; she looks like a non-green Princess Fiona). When the ex-beauty queen married Arnim Ramdass, she didn't take his name -- and one can hardly blame her.

But she's happy to take his money (which may really be "their" money; more on that below). From the Miami Herald:

Some husbands shower their wives with gifts when they win the Lotto. Arnim Ramdass kept the good news to himself. And when Donna Campbell found out on her own, her husband went AWOL, leaving the former beauty queen emotionally drained and financially desperate.

So she sued.

Campbell v. Ramdass, the lawsuit, comes to a Miami-Dade courtroom this week. It's a tale of luck and betrayal, a case study in how a financial windfall can make a seemingly stable marriage go sour in a hurry. At stake: $600,000 in winnings, Ramdass' cut of a $19 million jackpot he split with 16 other mechanics at Miami International Airport.

Discussion picks up after the jump.

Flying these days is an exercise in self-humiliation. You pack your bag knowing that someone is likely to go through it, possibly in front of others. You have to strip down as you go through security. And the airlines have no respect for you as they announce that your flight is continually delayed due to "mechanical problems" or "weather."

All that's bad, but Gokhan Mutlu had it much worse on a recent JetBlue flight. From WCBS TV:

Initially, Mutlu was told a flight attendant had taken the last seat on the plane, but then he was advised she would sit in the employee "jump seat," meaning he could have the last seat, the lawsuit said.

The pilot told him 1 1/2 hours into the five-hour flight that he would have to relinquish the seat to the flight attendant, court papers say. But the pilot said that Mutlu could not sit in the jump seat because only JetBlue employees were permitted to sit there, the lawsuit said.

When Mutlu expressed reluctance to go sit in the bathroom, the pilot, who was not named in the lawsuit, told him that "he was the pilot, that this was his plane, under his command that (Mutlu) should be grateful for being on board," the lawsuit said.

When the aircraft hit turbulence and passengers were directed to return to their seats, but "the plaintiff had no seat to return to, sitting on a toilet stool with no seat belts," court papers say.

Mutlu is not taking it sitting down... this time. He's filed a $2 million lawsuit against JetBlue.

There may not be seat belts in the bathroom, but at least there's a decent amount of legroom.

Update: The New York Personal Injury Blog talks about how annoying this suit is for the rest of the personal injury law field.

Man Says JetBlue Pilot Forced Him To Sit On Toilet [WCBS TV via Drudge]

Bob Hezzelwood is serious about his beach time -- and serious about his right to spend that beach time in a speedo.

Last year, a sheriff's deputy gave Hezzelwood a ticket for his speedo-wearing ways:

[A] Lee County Sheriff’s deputy stopped by and wrote him a warning for trespassing.

The reason?

“Exposed scrotum,” the notice read. “Never return to Bonita Beach Main Access.”

But it turns out that, belied by his self-proclaimed “super-lazy” lifestyle, Beach Bob (more properly known as Robert Hezzelwood, 61, retired court reporter and Bonita Springs resident of 16 years) is a heckuva fighter.

The Naples Daily News has an extensive report on Hezzelwood's $4,000 legal fight to have the warning dismissed. Now Hezzelwood plans to file a lawsuit against the Lee County Sheriff's Office for violating his civil rights. "I’m a civilian out here who’s been picked on by a little bully deputy and that’s wrong. It’s just wrong," said Hezzelwood.

If you're wearing a speedo and don't have a super-hot bod, that's wrong. It's just wrong.

Beach Bob’s brouhaha: Swimsuit behind lawsuit [Naples Daily News]

New Yorker Kelly DeBrocky took her family to the aquarium in Norwalk, Connecticut. Her kid stepped in poo.

Now DeBrocky has filed a seriously sh**ty lawsuit against the city, seeking reimbursement for new shoes and the price of admission and parking. Maybe she's part of the secret movement trying to get everyone in the world to hate New Yorkers.

From the Stamford Advocate:

A New York woman who took her family to visit the Maritime Aquarium has filed a $100 claim against the city, saying her child's shoes, along with the entire outing, were ruined when her 1-year-old stepped in dog feces early last month outside the Maritime Garage.

Norwalk officials will deny the claim, city attorney M. Jeffry Spahr said.

"The official response is her claim is denied and poop happens," he said.

Awesome quote. City attorney M. Jeffry Spahr sounds like the man. Another great Spahr quote: "I'm also having a tough time picturing why [the child] had to be bathed after stepping in this unless he thought it was some kind of poop sandbox."

DeBrocky says it's no laughing matter and that she's "really skeeved." Well, we're really skeeved that your kid played in a poo sandbox and that you're suing someone for it.

P.S. Things could have been much worse for DeBrocky. What if the poop had been dumped on her stoop?

City: Mom's claim stinks [Stamford Advocate]

Americans already struggle with knowledge of history. Now, some guy wants to make the whole "Founding Fathers" thing even more complicated. If he has his way, George Washington will no longer be the correct answer to "Who was our first president?" It'll be Samuel Huntington, who was elected president under the Articles of Confederation.

Ever heard of Elias Boudinot, Nathanial Gorham, Arthur St. Clair, or Cyrus Griffin? Well, those are some of the other guys that Stanley Klos wants you to remember as Founding Fathers and American presidents.

We're getting a headache. From the Suncoast News:

Klos has written a book on the subject and formed a corporation called Forgotten Founders Inc. He had an exhibit at the 2004 Republican convention and plans another at this year's Republican convention.

And now he has brought his case to federal court. He is suing Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, trying to force the government to include his 10 presidents on coins. The suit cites the "Presidential Coin Act," which directs the Treasury secretary to issue $1 coins emblematic of the Presidents of the United States, and to mint the coins until each president has been honored.

Klos claims in the lawsuit that failing to recognize these men harms his children and all students in America by misleading them about "the existence and identity of the earliest founders and the presidents of the United States."

Klos said U.S. District Judge Steven D. Merryday, who has been assigned the case, "has a chance to right history. If he does it, it'll finally correct the textbooks."

We are still recovering from Pluto being declared "not a planet." How much more revision of our elementary school understanding of the world are we expected to take?

Scholar Sues To Recognize 'Presidents' Before Washington [Suncoast News]

Richard Peltz teaches torts and con law at the William H. Bowen School of Law at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. Within Arkansas, he is a well-known expert on freedom of speech, cited by the Arkansas Supreme Court. In 2005, he exercised his freedom of speech while talking about affirmative action during a con law lecture. From the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette:

In that class, Peltz displayed a satirical article about the death of Rosa Parks and made comments about friends who weren’t admitted to law school because of affirmative action, according to a letter students wrote about a year and a half later to law school Dean Chuck Goldner. The students also said Peltz promised to give black students who scored as high as white students an extra point on the final exam.

Apparently, the satirical article was Now We Can Finally Put Civil Rights Behind Us, from the Onion.

Though the issue was resolved in 2005, the allegations of racism reemerged in 2007, during a controversy over there being no black students on the Law Review. (The admissions website says the school has 440 students, and that 30% of the 2007 entering class was "of color.")

From this description, it sounds like there's a race war brewing at the UALR's Law School. And Professor Peltz just put himself in the middle of it, suing his black students and Arkansas's black law association for defamation:

In a nine-page lawsuit filed last week, he complains that the defendants, students Valerie D. Nation of Little Rock and Chrishuana L. Clark of Pine Bluff, who are officers or former officers with the university’s Black Law Student Association, and attorney Eric Spencer Buchanan, president of the W. Harold Flowers Law Society, have been making false accusations against him around the law school and statewide legal community since the fall of 2005. In the lawsuit, he asks for unspecified punitive and compensatory damages.

Ironically, if Peltz's suit is successful, it may limit speech on campus, says Jonathan Knight, director of programs on academic freedom and tenure at the American Association of University Professors in Washington, in the Gazette.

Getting sued by your law professor? Worst. Homework. Ever.

Read about another professor-versus-student lawsuit, after the jump.

This suit points to an upside of being in federal prison county jail for capital murder: weight loss!

But this inmate is not happy about it and is suing the prison. Broderick Laswell entered prison at 418 pounds and says he's "literally being starved to death," losing about a half-pound per day. From the Arkansas Democratic Gazette:

Broderick Lloyd Laswell says he isn’t happy that he’s lost 105 pounds over the past eight months and is down to 308 pounds.

Laswell is an inmate in the Benton County Jail and has filed a federal court suit complaining about the diet he’s been fed by the county.

Facing a possible death penalty, this seems like the least of one's concerns. But food is one of life's great pleasures... even prison gruel.

“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,” Laswell wrote in his complaint. “About an hour after each meal my stomach starts to hurt and growl. I feel hungry again.”

If the lawsuit doesn't work out, maybe he could work out some kind of weight loss spokesperson deal with the prison system, like Jared of Subway fame.

Murder-case defendant complains about jail diet, resulting weight loss [Arkansas Democrat Gazette]
Broderick Lloyd Laswell suit: I'm only getting 3000 calories a day [Overlawyered]

A Chicago Bulls fan brings us a new reason not to fraternize with sports mascots. After a high-five gone wrong, Don Kalant suffered an arm injury, and now he's suing the team.

Dr. Don Kalant Sr. alleged he was sitting near courtside on Feb. 12 when he raised his arm to get a high-five from Barry Anderson, who portrays the exuberant mascot in a bright red fuzzy costume.

But Kalant, an oral surgeon, may now wish he had settled for a fist-bump instead.

Instead of merely slapping Kalant's palm, Anderson grabbed his arm as he fell forward, hyperextending Kalant's arm and rupturing his biceps muscle, according to the lawsuit filed in Cook County Circuit Court.

This isn't the first time Benny has seen red and attacked. In 2006, he was arrested and charged with misdemeanor battery for punching a sheriff's deputy.

How can something so cute and furry have so much rage?

Kalant stayed for the rest of the game but later had surgery and could miss as much as four months of work, Kasserman said. Kalant is seeking unspecified damages for medical bills, physical pain and lost earnings. The lawsuit claims Anderson was negligent in either "falling forward while grabbing a fan's hand" or "running out of control" through the crowd.

Can Benny defend himself by saying that "running out of control through the crowd" is a mascot's job?

C'mon, a real fan would just take the injury like a man, enjoy the time off, eat the medical expenses, and not sue his team. Sheesh.

Oral surgeon says in suit that he was injured in high-five with Chicago Bulls mascot [Chicago Tribune]

We're not considering a spin-off blog on animals and the law. But maybe we should given the amount of reporting we've done on our furry friends recently, including a lascivious wombat, a hedgehog as a weapon, and a dog in mortal peril. Now, we've got a diseased hamster to add to the mix:

A Whitman woman whose husband died less than a month after receiving a tainted liver transplant says a diseased hamster purchased at PetSmart is to blame for her premature widowhood.

Nancy Magee, 51, is suing the Phoenix-based pet industry giant for negligence.

Businessman Thomas J. Magee was 54 in 2005 when he was one of three people who died after receiving organs donated by a woman who had contracted lynphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) from a sickly hamster she bought on March 19, 2005, at a PetSmart store in Warwick, R.I., according to Nancy Magee’s complaint in U.S. District Court.

ATL does not have a heart of stone. We are sympathetic to the woman and her loss. We just don't dig the logic in placing the blame with PetSmart. Unless the logic is that a pet store has deeper pockets than a hospital.

Forget PetSmart. That sickly hamster better be behind bars.

Widow sues PetSmart in transplant death [The Boston Herald]

Every now and then, it's healthy to be reminded of the triviality of your daily preoccupations. From the New York Times:

[T]wo men pursuing a lawsuit in federal court in Hawaii.... think a giant particle accelerator that will begin smashing protons together outside Geneva this summer might produce a black hole or something else that will spell the end of the Earth — and maybe the universe.

Scientists say that is very unlikely — though they have done some checking just to make sure.

That's nice to know.

[Plaintiffs] Walter L. Wagner and Luis Sancho contend that scientists at the European Center for Nuclear Research, or CERN, have played down the chances that the collider could produce, among other horrors, a tiny black hole, which, they say, could eat the Earth. Or it could spit out something called a “strangelet” that would convert our planet to a shrunken dense dead lump of something called “strange matter.” Their suit also says CERN has failed to provide an environmental impact statement as required under the National Environmental Policy Act.

Alas, this valiant effort to save human civilization may be frustrated, thanks to something as pedestrian and technical as.... jurisdiction:

James Gillies, head of communications at CERN, said the laboratory as of yet had no comment on the suit. “It’s hard to see how a district court in Hawaii has jurisdiction over an intergovernmental organization in Europe,” Mr. Gillies said.

And that's the story of how, for want of personal jurisdiction, mankind was lost.

(For the record, CERN denies that what they're doing is unsafe, citing multiple scientific reports that have evaluated their activities from a safety standpoint.)

Asking a Judge to Save the World, and Maybe a Whole Lot More [New York Times]

Disney World is one of those places that's magical through the eyes of a 5-year-old, but the realization of one of Dante's circles for adults. The long waits, the overpriced tickets and food, the body odor of foreign tourists, and the fear of being viciously attacked for cutting in line:

Aimee Krause says Victoria Walker accused her of cutting into the line at the Mad Tea Cup ride last year at Disney World, MyFOXOrlando reports.

Walker, an Alabama native, could face 15 years behind bars if convicted of battery with a deadly weapon.

Krause has now filed additional charges claiming her children were also attacked.

“She came from behind just screaming,” Krause told MyFOXOrlando. “Next thing I knew she kicked me in my left leg, threw me to the ground and at that point I was pinned between the teacup and the saucer and she continued to beat up on my body.”

In the incident report, Krause claimed Walker tried to choke her with a lanyard she wore to hold water bottles around her neck, MyFOXOrlando reports.

One more reason not to wear a lanyard leash. We wonder if a lanyard has been defined as a deadly weapon before.

We agree with the Washington Post's assessment. Attacking a woman and her children is a terrible thing. But we do hate people who cut in line. Maybe Walker will plead temporary insanity, brought on by the Mad Hatter, the Caterpillar, and whatever crazy drug he had in that hookah.

Woman Charged With 'Line Rage' Beating at Disney World [Fox News via Jaunted]
Insta-CoGo: Line Rage at Disney World? [Washington Post]