Well, they did it.
After months of high tension — 26 of them, in fact – the Supreme Court of California at last ruled this week on whether cities, counties, villages, water districts, wide spots in the road, and other public entities may hire private lawyers to represent them in public nuisance cases on a contingent
Does a contingent fee give lawyers too much control over public nuisance cases?
Or can public entities control the lawyers enough to prevent abuse of the governmental power they wield?
The Supreme Court of California heard argument on those questions this week (finally). Kimberley Kralowec at The UCL Practitioner gives us a blow-by-blow.
The Rhode
A law professor, a law student, and a lawyer have written a Working Paper on lawsuits that aim to hold greenhouse gas producers liable for global warming. Laurence H. Tribe, Joshua D. Branson & Tristan L. Duncan, "Too Hot for Courts to Handle: Fuel Temperatures, Global Warming, and the Political Question Doctrine", Washington
Hurricane Katrina hit Louisiana and Mississippi on August 29, 2005.
On September 23, Blawgletter reported that the Second Circuit revived a complaint that tied CO2 emissions to global warming under a public nuisance claim.
Last Friday, the Fifth Circuit reached the same result in a case arising from Hurricane Katrina. A class of Mississippi