class actions, disabled rights, copyright, attorneys general, online speech, law schools, obesity, New York, mortgages, legal blogs, safety, CPSC, pharmaceuticals, patent trolls, ADA filing mills, international human rights, humor, hate speech, illegal drugs, immigration law, cellphones, international law, real estate, bar associations, Environmental Protection Agency, First Amendment, insurance fraud, slip and fall, smoking bans, emergency medicine, regulation and its reform, dramshop statutes, hotels, web accessibility, United Nations, Alien Tort Claims Act, lobbyists, pools, school discipline, Voting Rights Act, legal services programs
   
   
 
   

FORUM

« Radio America | Fen-phen food fight »

December 16, 2004


New York AG's office

...slips up in a major way in its boring old core function of defending the state in litigation. The result: the state loses its right to present expert testimony and runs into a $42.4 million tort verdict in a case arising from a Thruway accident that catastrophically injured a nine-year-old boy when his mother fell asleep at the wheel and went off the road (lawyers for the family sued on the grounds that a planned guardrail had never been erected). If Spitzer & Co. were a private law firm, would its client have a malpractice claim?

Posted by Walter Olson at 12:06 AM | TrackBack (0)



categories:
NY & Region
Regulation Through Litigation









 

 

Published by the Manhattan Institute

The Manhattan Insitute's Center for Legal Policy.