AHLA's monthly podcast featuring health lawyer and blogger Norm Tabler's informative and entertaining take on recent health law and other legal developments.
To learn more about AHLA and the educational resources available to the health law community, visit americanhealthlaw.org.
AHLA's monthly podcast featuring health lawyer and blogger Norm Tabler's informative and entertaining take on recent health law and other legal developments.
To learn more about AHLA and the educational resources available to the health law community, visit americanhealthlaw.org.
<silence>
Speaker 2:This episode of A HLA Speaking of health law is brought to you by A HLA members and donors like you. For more information, visit american health law.org.
Speaker 3:Hi. I am Norm Tabor with this month's edition of the Lighter Side of Health Law Wisdom from Captain Obvious . Okay. This comes from the Ohio Court of Appeals, but it could have been written by Captain Obvious . When the jury found in favor of a pathologist in a med mal case, plaintiff Angela Pennington appealed , but for some unexplained reason, she and her lawyer did not submit the whole transcript, only cross-examination of the pathologist. The court ruled that without the whole transcript, it was obligated to presume that substantial justice was done. So in case you had any doubt, now you know when you appeal, don't just file the part of the trial transcript. You like file the whole thing. The case is Pennington versus Mercy Regional Med Center , Ohio Court of Appeals. Elvis protects Elvis's voice and others too . Well, that requires a little explanation. A New Tennessee statute protects the voices of singers, performers, and other celebrities from artificial intelligence and deep fakes. It protects voices by making them a protected right along with name, photo, and likeness. It's the first state in the union to explicitly protect voices. Where does Elvis come in? You're asking? Well, conforming to the unwritten rule that a statute should have acute acronym, Tennessee has named the law Elvis for ensuring likeness voice and image security. Thank you very much. Microsoft made me do it. The lawyer representing gaming company High Five found out the hard way that footnotes count even if Microsoft Word refuses to count them. She filed briefs that exceeded the word limit ordered by the judge and the opposing firm move for sanctions. What did the lawyer have to say for herself? Well, she said that the briefs were within the word limit. If you didn't count the footnotes, the judge responded as you might expect that the words in the footnotes are just that words, so they do count. Well, the lawyer replied, I know that, but Microsoft Word doesn't, at least not my Microsoft Word. It had somehow, without my knowledge, turned on a function that excludes footnotes from the word count. So the word count that I looked at didn't include any footnotes. The judge made it clear that she did not believe the excuse, but nevertheless declined to sanction the offender. However, she went on to declare that she would not read the footnotes. The case is Larson versus High Five Games Western District Washington. Toughest argument of the month, the award for toughest argument of the month goes to Treasure Hunter. Roger May, Roger and business partner Peter Catel , spent millions searching for the remains of a 1901 shipwreck off the coast of Alaska. The ship contained millions of dollars worth of Canadian gold. They didn't find it. What's more? They split up and Peter refused to give Roger the treasure map without which Roger had no idea where to search. Roger won a $7.5 million judgment against Peter in a county court. He then sued insurer, great American Insurance for the $7.5 million in federal court on the theory that what he had suffered was an accidental loss. Great American declined coverage, and the court agreed ruling. In effect, there was no accident here. Peter withheld the map on purpose, not by accident. That's when Roger made the toughest argument of the month before the ninth Circuit. Sure, he argued, Peter withheld the map on purpose, but he only meant to deprive me of the map, not the ability to find the shipwreck. So actually, I lost that ability by accident. When the judges stopped laughing, they affirmed the district court ruling against Roger. The case is Great American versus May 9th Circuit, doing things the wrong way, when the right way would be easier. Many years ago, I interviewed a law student who recounted that when he worked in an auto assembly plant the previous summer, he felt pressured to do what many other workers did, which was to find a place to hide for as much of the shift as possible, thereby avoiding the work. The problem was he observed that finding a place and remaining alert for discovery was actually more demanding than doing the assigned work. I thought of that conversation when I read about Atlanta chiropractor Rashad Sanford, who was ensnared in the NBA Players health fund fraud. He has been sentenced to six months in prison, followed by six months of hope confinement, followed by two and a half more years of supervision, plus forfeiture of $80,000. What did he do? Well, he submitted bills of $112,000 for chiropractic services to Glenn Big Baby Davis, but he didn't actually perform any services. My question is, wouldn't it have been a lot easier as well as safer to actually perform the services on Big Baby? The case is US versus Williams Southern District New York, an argument that proves too much. Here's something you don't see every day. Plaintiffs lost the case because their argument proved too much. The plaintiffs brought a class action against the manufacturer of a granola bar full of nuts and grain. They claim that the words all natural on the package were a lie and deceived consumers. Why? Because in addition to the nuts and grain, the bar included some things that aren't natural. That's not what consumers expect when they buy something called All Natural . What do they expect? The court asked Easy. The plaintiffs responded. They expect what the dictionary defines as natural, which is quote , existing or caused by nature not made or caused by humankind. Well, the court ruled that would exclude every snack bar on Earth because they're all made by humankind. Case dismissed. The case is Bustamante versus kind. Second Circuit hot mic strikes. Again, that's Mike, MIC as in microphone, Texas. Judge Nancy Esparza was presiding over a murder trial and having what she thought was a private conversation with staff during a break. When her last words were quote , oh, shoot, I'm still streaming. That was immediately after her second to last words, which were, we all know he is going to get convicted and get a bunch of time. Nancy has recused herself. I'm not as bad as he is. Here's a defense that I suppose you only use when your back is truly to the wall and you have nothing else to say. It's the, okay, I'm bad, but I'm not as bad as my partner in crime Defense for a shining example of it, consider the pleas of Gia Lou at his sentencing hearing for selling false COVID-19 vaccination cards. Here's why he deserves a lighter sentence as he sees it. Well, his partner in crime is a nurse while he himself is just some schmuck. How is that relevant? Well, since my partner is a nurse, when he did what we did, he was abusing a position of trust, but schmuck isn't a position of trust, so I wasn't abusing anything. Second, he made more money from the scam than I did $8,500 more to be exact, so I should get a shorter sentence than he does after all. Fair is fair, and it worked. He got 21 months compared to his partner's. 30. The case is US versus Rodriguez, Eastern District, New York, living up to his name, Florida lawyer, Matt Shirk , that's S-H-I-R-K, certainly lived up to his name. He was suspended from practice by the Florida bar, but kept right on lawyering and shirking. First there was the suspension. Why? Because as a public defender, Matt hired female employees in a manner the bar described as quote out of normal hiring practices. How so? Well, he hired them from a hooter style restaurant. He served them alcohol in the office during business hours. He sent them flirtatious notes, then fired them, quote , to save my marriage. So he was suspended from practice by the bar, and as a result by the Immigration service, being suspended from the bar and from the Immigration Service would stop most lawyers from practicing law, especially before the immigration service, but not Matt. He kept right at it. When caught. He explained that he didn't think you had to be a lawyer to practice before the immigration service. Then why did you continue to identify yourself as a lawyer on the immigration forms? Oh, that Matt responded. That was a complete oversight. Matt is no longer suspended. He's disbarred. Complaint department, the Eldrick syndrome. I admitted all my life. I've been a little jealous of guys with cool names. When I was a kid, I'd have given anything to be named something cool and snappy like Brad or maybe Chip. Once I grew up, I realized that for occupations like lawyer or accountant, a sober name like Marvin or yes, even Norman was appropriate, but I never quite got over my jealousy of cool names. That's why it irritates me every time I find out that a guy with a cool name has made it up. It's not his real name, or at least not his real first name. I call it the Eldrich Syndrome. Why? Because Tiger Woods isn't really Tiger Woods. He's Eldrich Woods. It's that way with so many cool names. Scratch the tiger and you'll find an eldrich hiding back there on the birth certificate. I give actors a pass because so many of their names are obviously made up. Nobody believes that Tab Hunter's parents named him Tab. Same for Rock Hudson. Even John Wayne. Wasn't John Wayne? He was Marian Morrison. Yes. I said, Marian , are you impressed by the short, punchy sound of MIT in MIT Romney? I was, and a little jealous too until I found out it's his middle name. His first name is Willard. That may be less cool than Norman. Spike Lee Dry Shelton Lee. But the one that annoys me most is Boomer Ayaan . Boomer is the former NFL quarterback, current sports commentator, but his name is not really Boomer. It's Norman. I don't know why that one bothers me. It just does. If you have a complaint, send it to me. Well, that's it for this month's edition. I hope you liked it. I'll be back next month with another edition of the Lighter Side of Health Law.
Speaker 2:Thank you for listening. If you enjoyed this episode, be sure to subscribe to A HLA speaking of health law wherever you get your podcasts. To learn more about a HA and the educational resources available to the health law community, visit American Health Law .