A year ago, a Madison County judge in the meritless atrazine litigation unsealed PR documents that showed, heaven forfend, that the defendants were exercising their First Amendment rights to defend themselves against false accusations. Now there's evidence that, surprise, surprise, the plaintiffs are doing the same thing they pearl-clutched about when the defendants did it, though one doubts the judge will let defendants conduct discovery on the Center for Media and Democracy or who leaked documents to them. But as Ed Murnane and Tiger Joyce ask, "why would Madison County judges ignore overwhelming science and favor the plaintiffs when so many of the county's tax-paying residents earn their livelihoods in conventional agriculture?"
PR efforts in atrazine litigation
- Judge orders end to trial reservation system in Madison County asbestos docket
- More on 2006 Louisiana environmental law's jackpot justice
- "Missouri lawyers weigh in on class action concerns"
- Madison County's controversial asbestos litigation system under fire yet again
- Around the web, December 15
- "Something intrinsically unusual is occurring in Philadelphia"
- Another lawless jackpot award over propofol in Nevada
- "State Court Challenges to Legislatively Enacted Tort Reforms"
- Missouri Supreme Court refuses to review Bachman v. A.G. Edwards
- Texas Supreme Court finishes off Garza v. Merck
- Around the web, August 25
- Around the web, August 22
- "Win or lose, trial lawyers get millions in Vioxx fees"
- Vioxx fee-ing frenzy
Center for Legal Policy at the