On July 24-29, the American Association of Justice will be holding its annual conference in San Francisco. Originally they were scheduled to be meeting at the Manchester Hyatt in San Diego, but the labor community put a nix on that. So the AAJ will be meeting this year at the Hilton San Francisco (I hope they have their Prop. 65 warnings posted).

I am not usually picky about which conferences decide to come to our state, but in this case I draw a line. If the trial lawyers want to spend time in our state figuring out how they can sue business and industry they can quite frankly take their business elsewhere. I am sure Florida would be a nice setting. There are certainly enough hotels, runways long enough for their G5’s and plenty of sharks to make them feel at home. And more golf courses then they will ever want.

At a time when California can’t afford to pay its employees, vendors or bills, the state now has to pay hundreds of thousands to a Vallejo woman injured when then state Senator Carole Midgen rammed her from behind after an erratic driving spree that had eight people calling 911. With state officials are calling on us to identify government waste, we need look no further than this case.

At a time when services are being cut and taxes proposed, Californians are covering costs for a former elected official who was not obeying the law at the time of the accident. In 2007, Ms. Migden pled no contest to misdemeanor reckless driving after the incident in which her state car repeatedly banged the median on Interstate 80, weaved across lanes and rear-ended another car after narrowly missing several other vehicles. This 30 minute joy ride has ultimately cost the taxpayers of California $335,000 in a settlement and another $25,000 in property damages. Meanwhile, Migden was sentenced to two years of court supervised probation and paid a whopping $710 in fees for the incident.

Even after her wild ride, Midgen was appointed by Governor Schwarzenegger to the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) and earns roughly $132,000.

In our continuing series of what a racket Proposition 65 has created, I thought I would focus in one individual “private attorney” that seems to have carved out a very nice practice for himself. Interestingly, if you google Anthony Held Ph.d, the only reference you can find is that on the website Prop65ClearingHouse.com/. I will talk about that a little later.

The state law requires any person suing “in the public interest” to enforce Proposition 65, “The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986,” to notify the Attorney General of the lawsuit and the outcome of the case. Each year, the Attorney General posts the annual listings of settlements. In an earlier blog I put a few examples of this utter shakedown process and showed the outrageous fees these scam artists are getting for supposedly protecting the public.

Dr. Held caught my eye because he seems to really have a ferocity for filing suits against businesses. Just in 2008, Dr. Held had a total of 31 settlements with judgments totaling $1,173,250. His “attorney fees” were $901,150. The civil penalties against the 31 entities totaled $272,100.

Yesterday, The Milken Institute released a new report titled, Manufacturing 2.0 – A More Prosperous California. The report was released in cooperation with the California Manufacturing and Technology Association (CMTA).

According to the report, California has 21 percent fewer manufacturing jobs in 2007 than in 2000, compared with a decline of 20 percent nationally and 13 percent among seven states that are competing for the same types of manufacturing jobs. It went on to say that driving the decline is California’s reputation for an unfriendly business climate, comparatively high tax rates, a restrictive regulatory climate and unsustainable government spending.

I am just surprised that litigation was not also included. In addition to the items mentioned above, one thing that impacts economic development and steers businesses to other state or countries is a state’s litigation climate. All of these items go hand in hand at turning businesses away. I can see why Governor Perry in Texas is having such a great time.

At one point in history, every business was a small business. However, small businesses are being tested in these economic and legislative times more than ever. Just last week President Obama touted the "Courage and Honor" of small businesses. Yesterday, Governor Schwarzenegger and other legislative leaders in California talked about promoting policies that would encourage the growth of small businesses in California during California Small Business Day 2009.

This all sounds great and I am sure the 3.5 million small businesses in California appreciate it. However, in this economy talk is cheap and small business people need answers. In a survey California CALA did with the National Federation of Independent Business in California among small business owners, 95 percent of the businesses surveyed believe current laws favor those who sue. Additionally, 98 percent said they believe new laws are needed to protect businesses against lawsuit abuse.

If I hear one more thing about how Proposition 65 is the great environmental protector I think I am going to have to check myself in. This initiative was passed by the voters of California in 1986. Whatever the voters thought they were doing has really turned into a windfall for a small group of attorneys.

Recently, our esteemed Attorney General Jerry Brown, posted the 2008 list of Proposition 65 settlements for our state. It is an absolute joke what is going on in California in the name of environmental protection. One firm, the Environmental Law Foundation, had one settlement against Laidlaw for $6.6 million. Guess what the attorney’s fee was in the case – $6.6 million. The Mateel Environmental Justice Foundation had 39 settlements for a total of $1,775,300. Its fees totaled $1,060,000. Insane and it gets better.

One organization called the Consumer Advocacy Group seems to have boutique practice at tackling Prop. 65 warnings. The firm had 31 settlements totaling $1,003,250. Its fees… $972,750! Are you kidding me!?!?!?!?!?!

Every year, during the second full week of May, the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) and the Superior Courts in California team up to recognize the millions of Californians who answer the call and the serve on juries in our great state. California Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse (CALA) would like to also applaud these great Californians who take the time to serve their state.

This is not sometimes a perfect system, but it does work and it is truly a system of the people, by the people and for the people. As Chief Justice Ronald George has stated, "trial by a jury of one’s peers is among the fundamental democratic ideals of our nation. Serving as jurors reminds us that these ideals exist only as long as individual citizens are willing to uphold them."

Our jury system has come a long way. Some statistics compiled by the AOC show directly what an impressive system we have in California.

On April 28th, the personal injury lawyer lobby swept down upon Sacramento for its annual lobby day, making sure that its $4.1 million dollar investment during the 07/08 election cycle is paying off. These are good times for the personal injury lobby. They delivered nationally for Barack Obama and Congress and they even had a pretty decent year in California. Their ship has come in and the first thing the President did for them was to sign the Ledbetter legislation into law.

The Consumer Attorneys of California’s website states "special interest lobbyists are using the economic downturn as cover for passing their anti-consumer, anti-patient, anti-worker and anti environmental agendas. Lobby Day is our opportunity for Consumer Attorneys to unite with one strong voice, reminding legislators why a fair legal system is so important and why we must fight to protect it." Give me a break. Was this written by Erin Brockovich?

If not, you might want to read on for a bit.  On February 10th, the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) went into effect.  Now – you should realize that anytime government uses the term “improvement,” trouble is probably the next thing coming.  The act provides for fines starting at $100,000 per violation and possible jail time for anyone selling items containing lead for use by children age 12 or under.  No one denies that lead ingestion can have severe health implications, but this is a train wreck.  A lot of people believe that Congress overreacted with this legislation and made matters even worse when they let state attorneys general sue, or even hire personal injury lawyers to sue, to enforce their own interpretations of the law.

The end result of this law is that many businesses, from used bookstores to thrift shops and even libraries, are being forced to throw out inventory, lay off workers or even close their doors.  The Motorcycle Industry Council has estimated $1 billion in economic loss from frozen inventory, payroll losses and lost opportunities for sales and service.

These three legislators and a whole host of co-authors have truly started off the new year on the right footing by trying to restore common sense through the Good Samaritan Act.
 

It seems that once again our California Supreme Court has gotten it wrong in its recent majority opinion stating that the good samaritan law should only apply to emergency medical care providers.  The opinion is based on a Los Angeles case involving a “friend” who pulled another friend out of a crashed car that she thought might catch fire.  The friend filed a suit claiming the other’s actions were negligent and rendered her a paraplegic.  The court should have also ruled on the definition of a friend.