Prisons

ATL Poll Results: The Baking Soda Lawsuit

By

We recently asked for your views on Ward v. Arm & Hammer, the civil action brought by a pro se prisoner against a leading baking soda manufacturer. If you don’t remember what the case was about, here’s the caption:
pro se Ward 0.JPG
The District Court didn’t think highly of the case. And neither did you:
atl poll results ward arm hammer.JPG
One additional interesting point, made by David Giacalone of Shlep: the Self-Help Law ExPress:

“Thanks to Ted Frank’s coverage, I learned that 28 U.S.C. 1915, the federal law covering prisoners seeking to file a case as a poor person, does not prevent a legally frivolous suit from being appealed in forma pauperis, unless the district court judge certifies that the appeal is not being taken in good faith, or the prisoner has had three prior suits that failed to state a valid claim, or were found to be frivolous or malicious.”

So even if you thought Ward was “the most frivolous lawsuit ever,” it’s hard to fault Judge Chesler for permitting an in forma pauperis appeal to the Third Circuit, given the applicable law.
Pro Se Recycling Goes Over and Above [Shlep: the Self-Help Law ExPress]
Because we all love wacky pro se suits: Ward v. Arm & Hammer [Overlawyered]
Earlier: Ward v. Arm & Hammer: What Do You Think?
The Fine Line Separating Pro Se Litigants, Plaintiffs’ Lawyers, and Law Professors

3 Comments

Non-Sequiturs: 12.19.06

By

* All may not be genetically sound with Suri babies of holoprosencephaly sufferers. (But does genetic perfection really exist?) And once again, wordplay gets us out of the woods of potential litigation by a crazy actor midget. [Overlawyered]
* Jack Abramoff has been hitting the books in the prison law library and will represent himself in two lawsuits filed against him by Indian tribes. I think “kitchen duty and carpentry” is prison-speak for “shower activities.” [Law.com]
* Off-ensive or just off-menu? Not brought to you by the people who brought you this refreshing drink. [Vivir Latino via Racialicious]
* Remember when we used to de-contract words (e.g., “does not” for “doesn’t”) to inch our way towards the minimum word requirement? [FN1] Apparently, this is the only way law school is not like high school. [PrawfsBlawg]
[FN1] Enough already! law professors lament. And yes, smart aleck, footnotes do count toward the word limit.
* Running with Scissors writer Augusten Burroughs is being sued for libel, not for his part in the adaptation of his memoir into the abysmally bad film version. [Vanity Fair]
* Any future husband of mine should be so lucky as to take on “Q” as their last name, or our combined last name. But for the record, could it be that “Buday” is pronounced “booty”? [ACLU of Southern California via PrawfsBlawg]

0 Comments

Ward v. Arm & Hammer: The Opinion

By

arm & hammer crack cocaine.jpegAs one of you has noted, our favorite pro se lawsuit, filed back in 2003, has already been decided.
Interested in seeing how the case was resolved? Check out the published opinion: Ward v. Arm & Hammer, 341 F.Supp.2d 499 (2004).
Ted Frank has the link, plus commentary. Click here to satisfy your curiosity.
Because we all love wacky pro se suits: Ward v. Arm & Hammer [Overlawyered]
Earlier: Ward v. Arm & Hammer: What Do You Think?
The Fine Line Separating Pro Se Litigants, Plaintiffs’ Lawyers, and Law Professors

1 Comment

Ward v. Arm & Hammer: What Do You Think?

By

Remember this great lawsuit, which we wrote about last week? In case you don’t, here’s a quick recap:
pro se Ward 0.JPG
Summary: Pro se litigant George Allen Ward is suing Arm & Hammer and its corporate parent, Church & Dwight, for $425 million. His theory of liability: failure to warn. The company failed to warn him that if he cooked up THEIR PRODUCT, baking soda, with cocaine, he might end up serving a 200-month prison sentence on crack cocaine charges. You can read the full pleading here.
Opinion among ATL commenters was deeply divided. Some found the lawsuit almost offensive in its frivolousness, while others viewed it as presenting a colorable claim.
What do you think? We’d like to know (because commenters aren’t always representative of our entire readership). Time for a quick poll:

Make Free Online Polls

Earlier: The Fine Line Separating Pro Se Litigants, Plaintiffs’ Lawyers, and Law Professors

3 Comments

Morning Docket: 12.18.06

By

* Solitary confinement, cruel and unusual? Cruel, perhaps, but not that unusual. [St. Petersburg Times via How Appealing]
* Florida and California decide to take a little break on the whole lethal injection thing. [CNN]
* New Jersey Legislature does what New Jersey’s Supreme Court told them to. [FindLaw]
* Mariah Carey is concerned that people might be confused and think that she is someone who uses sex to make money….oh, wait a minute… [FOX News]
* Global warming is such a nuisance. [Jurist]

0 Comments

The Fine Line Separating Pro Se Litigants, Plaintiffs’ Lawyers, and Law Professors

By

Remember the Best Notice of Appeal Ever? We’ve finally found a filing that tops it.
Pro se litigants, plaintiffs’ lawyers, and law professors all share the ability to “think outside the box.” They come up with novel and creative theories of liability — ones that courts have never entertained before.
Some are crazy. Some are brilliant. And some fall somewhere in between. Consider this civil complaint:
pro se Ward 0.JPG
Summary: Pro se litigant George Allen Ward is suing Arm & Hammer and its corporate parent, Church & Dwight, for $425 million. His theory of liability: failure to warn. The company failed to warn him that if he cooked up THEIR PRODUCT, baking soda, with cocaine, he might end up serving a 200-month prison sentence on crack cocaine charges.
Ward argues that Arm & Hammer should add one of these warnings to boxes of baking soda:

“The use of this product with illegal drugs is punishable by law and is prohibited.”

“The use of this product with illegal drugs is punishable by enhanced penalties by the laws of the United States of America.”

This is just the beginning; the whole complaint is genius. It’s strangely compelling, and it gets better with every page. Also, we think it might fly in the Ninth Circuit.
We reprint the rest of the pleading after the jump. Enjoy!

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “The Fine Line Separating Pro Se Litigants, Plaintiffs’ Lawyers, and Law Professors”

49 Comments

Morning Docket: 12.11.06

By

* Congrats to Troy Smith on winning the Heisman. As always, there’s a legal connection, which this time involves Ohio State, the Heisman, Archie Griffin, and Woody Hayes. [WSJ Law Blog]
* All Christmas trees have been removed from the Seattle airport, after a rabbi threatened to sue unless an eight-foot menorah was put up. [King5.com]
* Finally, Cedar Point is standing up for students’ rights, by lobbying the government for longer summer vacations. [Associated Press]
* Wish they all could be California… prisons? Unlikely. [New York Times]
* The Williams sisters are in court. No word yet on how they were served. [CNN]

0 Comments

Morning Docket: 11.28.06

By

* Happy Anniversary, Justice Stevens. [Associated Press via How Appealing]
* Our low low prices on handmade office furniture are cruel and unusual! [MSNBC]
* The Court lights one up for Big Tobacco. [Law.com]
* Milberg Weiss’s judgment day: January 2008. [New York Times]

0 Comments

Non-Sequiturs: 11.14.06

By

* In the 7th grade, we abided by the “one best friend” law, so we could totally pledge our loyalty to just one dog who also definitely wouldn’t steal our boyfriend. [New York Times]
* German Chancellor Angela Merkel admits to an incident of youthful “corruption,” but would you have rather she bartered sexual favors for her driver’s license? We’re letting this slide too. [The Times]
* We hear freshmen housed in state school dorms are joining the lawsuit. [Los Angeles Times]
* Since all of my disposable income after rent, I-Pod upgrades and therapy goes to clothes, I for one can say that status is one of the more noble causes a person can embrace. I mean, honestly, without fashion, 90% of third world kids would be unemployed. [University of Chicago Law School Faculty Blog]
* Honor among greedy bastards: Corporate greedy bastards deserve their obscene paychecks, says greedy bastard M&A lawyer Martin Lipton. [Reuters]
[Ed. note: Please note that this post is signed by Stella Q. Some of us were very happy to receive obscene paychecks courtesy of Mr. Lipton. (And if Wachtell Lipton's midyear bonuses are any indication, year-end bonuses at the firm will be especially obscene this year.)]

1 Comment
Page 10 of 101...678910