Star Litigator Jay Lefkowitz Goes Pro Bono in California School Reform Case

February 22nd, 2011. By BrendaC

Lawyers Giving Back looks at a side of lawyers you don’t hear too much about—the side that gives back…pays it forward..and shares the love. We’ve found quite a number of attorneys who log non-billable hours helping others—simply because they believe it’s the right thing to do. Their stories are inspiring, and hey, who knew lawyers were so…good? If you’ve got a story to share about an attorney who’s doing the right thing, let us know—we’d love to let others know, too. Today, we’re talking with attorney Jay Lefkowitz…

Attorney Jay Lefkowitz: “If any school deserves to have a shot at reform it’s McKinley.”

A news story about a determined group of parents petitioning for school reform in an impoverished California school district recently caught the eye of high profile internationally known attorney Jay Lefkowitz. No ordinary mortal, Lefkowitz has had a notable career in public service, including an assignment as a special envoy to Korea and also White House advisor to both George H.W. Bush and Bush the younger. Now a partner with Kirkland & Ellis in New York City he is often approached to do pro bono work. “If I think it is an appropriate case, I often say yes,” says Lefkowitz.

 

Attorney Jay Lefkowitz

“In this case, I literally read the article, then picked up the phone and let the parents know I was available to help them. I was just so taken by the power of what they had organized to do.”

Lefkowiitz has a long established interest in education reform—he fought for the right of parents to direct public tax dollars to private education in Florida in 2006 in the school voucher wars—and won.

In the California story he saw another group of parents fighting a system, he says, that “has long empowered teachers, but not parents. I was attracted to their story and told them I would represent them pro bono.”

A mostly Latino school in an impoverished Los Angeles neighborhood, McKinley Elementary is one of the lowest ranked schools in the district of Compton. Unwilling to continue to tolerate a substandard education for their children, a group of parents is using the power of petition under California’s new Parent Empowerment Act to demand reform.

“Mckinley is ranked 22 out of 24 elementary schools in Compton and of course Compton is lowest performing school district in the whole state,” says Lefkowitz, “so if any school deserves to have a shot at reform it’s McKinley.”

The so-called ‘Parent Trigger Act’ requires school boards to make changes when presented with a petition signed by at least 51 percent of parents. But the McKinley parents demand that the school be turned into a charter school that would give them more control over the administration or staffing—and they’re meeting strong resistance from teachers and school board members.

“What we have here are parents seeking to really take control of the educational destiny of their children and a school board that has been really extraordinarily heavy-handed in trying to deny the effect of the law,” says Lefkowitz.

The school board demanded that every person who signed the petition come in person to present photo i.d.—something that the Parent Trigger Act does not stipulate.

“Placing requirements in terms of an in-person photo i.d. requirement would have had a chilling effect on the parents themselves,” says Lefkowitz, who recently obtained a temporary restraining order barring the school from demanding photo i.d.

On February 3, Lefkowitz and another partner from Kirkland & Ellis filed a class action against the Compton Unified School District in Los Angeles.

“We are obviously hoping that the school board will back down and stop threatening the parents,” he adds. “We didn’t want to have to file a lawsuit,” says Lefkowitz, who has a reputation as a hardnosed litigator. “We were hoping that the school board would accept the petition that the parents signed, follow the law and allow the school to become a charter school.”

Lefkowitz admits there could be countless more pro bono hours to come if the board doesn’t retreat. He doesn’t sound too worried about that.

Jay Lefkowitz is a partner with Kirkland and Ellis in New York City. With more than 1,500 lawyers, the firm provides service to clients around the world in the areas of complex litigation, corporate and tax and intellectual property. Lefkowitz has appeared in courtrooms in at least 30 states and won numerous multi-million dollar verdicts and settlements. He is also an adjunct professor at the Columbia School of Law.

The Drugs You Get from Your Kitchen Faucet

February 18th, 2011. By Hunter West

The next time I look to buy fish—and I don’t care if it’s fresh or frozen—I’m gonna want to make sure the fish was happy before it met its ultimate end.

If that fish came from the St. Lawrence Seaway, there’s a good chance my intended dinner was, indeed happy. Probably high on Prozac.

Huh? Fish on Prozac? You’ve got to be kidding, you say. But no, the sad truth is that our fish and aquatic wildlife is on Prozac and lord knows what else from the stuff we put in the water. And we’re doing it to them…

Here’s the deal. A peer-reviewed study conducted by the Universite de Montreal together with Environment Canada and published last month in the journal Chemosphere found that fish swimming in the St. Lawrence Seaway were found to have copious amounts of antidepressants in their systems.

Most of the stuff was found in their liver. A lesser amount was found in their brains. Okay, so maybe they weren’t all that happy after all.

The least amount—and you’ll be happy to hear this—was found in muscle tissue which is typically the stuff we humans eat. UdeM professor Sebastien Sauve, a co-author of the study, said in comments published January 22^nd in the Montreal Gazette that he isn’t worried about consumers ingesting Read the rest of this entry »

Asbestos News Roundup: 2.17.11

February 17th, 2011. By LucyC

A roundup of recent asbestos-related news and information that you should be aware of. An ongoing list of asbestos hot spots from the Asbestos News Roundup archive appears on our asbestos map.

Asbestos Law

Des Moines, IA: The supervisor of a renovation project in downtown Des Moines has pled guilty to the charges of illegal removal of asbestos from the landmark Equitable Building.

Russell Coco, 51, entered the plea as part of a plea agreement with the federal government. He had been indicted on 11 counts of illegal asbestos removal, conspiracy to impede and impair EPA procedures regarding safe asbestos removal, and violating work practice requirements of the Clean Air Act. The violations took place between 2005 and 2008. Developer Bob Knapp was also charged with illegal removal of asbestos.

Debra Scorpiniti, an assistant U.S. attorney, said during the hearing that the plea agreement calls for Coco to serve up to 12 months in prison and pay a fine of up to $250,000. He faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine on each of the two counts.

Knapp, 62, whose businesses are not affiliated with Knapp Properties, remains scheduled for trial Feb. 28 on the 11-count indictment for illegal removal of asbestos. (Des Moines Register)

Westchester County, NY: School janitor, Norman Morey, who was fired for complaining about possible asbestos contamination at the school where he worked in northern Westchester, N.Y., is not protected from retaliation. That’s the ruling that was handed down by the 2nd Circuit court and  upheld by the federal appeals panel recently. Morey was reportedly fired by Somers Central School District for complaining about fallen insulation.

Morey was head custodian at Somers Central High School, and a government employee. As part of his official duties he was responsible for cleaning up the insulation but not for complaining about it, apparently. The court concluded that his speech was not protected.

“The District Court correctly concluded that, on the evidence of record, any reasonable jury Read the rest of this entry »

Five Dollars says Footlong not Subway Trademark Infringement

February 17th, 2011. By AbiK

[vimeo]http://vimeo.com/10535376[/vimeo]

Any any any…FIVE…five dollar…five dollar footlong…any any any… Ok, if you sat transfixed in front of the tube during the last Olympic games, you could not have possibly missed the Subway jingle touting their five-dollar footlong sandwich. For that matter, if you’ve EVER sat in front of a television, you’ve probably needed some form of medical help to get that “any, any, any FIVE” exorcised from your brain.

Be that as it may, it seems Subway has taken claim to the word, “footlong”. Now, I use the term “word” loosely—as, after all, any self-respecting writer or editor would tell you that “footlong” is not, actually, a word. (Don’t believe me? Refer to the layman’s abridged Merriam-Webster online edition of the dictionary. It simply is not a word.) But, let’s just assume for now that it is.

Iowa chain store Casey’s General Stores, Inc.—which uses “footlong” on its menu boards—has filed a lawsuit against Subway seeking a federal judge to rule that “footlong” is a part of the vernacular, part of the “general English language” and not a word that can be the special property of Subway. Why, it would be as silly as suggesting that “yardstick” or “half-gallon size” were trademarkable. And what? Would every vendor who pushes a footlong hot dog be subject to trademark infringement if Subway could put a claim on the word?

You can see the absurdity of it. And, for that matter, why The Washington Post reports that the lawsuit filing also charges Subway with “frivolous litigation”. Think about it—there are well-paid attorneys working on this for Subway.

Speaking of Subway in-house counsel, Valerie Pochron is the attorney who had written to Casey’s to inform them that Subway had applied for a trademark on “footlong” and that Casey’s should cease and desist from using the word or face the consequences…the wrath of Subway in the form of legal action.

Interesting thing about Pochron though. This isn’t her first at-bat over trademark issues—hell, let’s hope not as she’s apparently a trademark attorney. Pochron had not too long ago gone after a website “MySubwayRewards.com”, claiming trademark infringement. She filed a complaint with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center in January, 2010. Now, yes, it’s a similar looking and sounding name and if Subway, the food chain, had actually been using “MySubway” or “MySubwayRewards” maybe Pochron would’ve been onto something.

But, while acknowledging that “Subway” is a fairly well known—perhaps even “famous” name—the owners of “MySubwayRewards.com” apparently never responded to the complaint (bluemaumau.com), and, here’s the kicker, the decision as it’s stated on the case document was as follows: “For all the foregoing reasons, the Complaint is denied.”

Ouch! It was pretty plain as day that such a URL could ultimately be a trademark issue—ok, maybe not right at that moment, but you could see where Pochran may have stood a chance. But no! And more specifically, the case doc states that “Inasmuch as the Panel finds that Complainant has failed in these proceedings to discharge its burden of establishing that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights, it is unnecessary to consider whether the second and third elements of the Policy have been met in the circumstances of this case.”

Failed to discharge it’s burden?!?

Slam! Case closed!

Don’t get me wrong here—I’m sure Pochron is a good lawyer who’s won a case or two. Be that as it may though, with the MySubwayRewards.com case as a backdrop, let’s see how successful Pochron is at claiming “footlong” is trademark infringement when she couldn’t even cough up enough to establish trademark violation when the company namewas being used. Note also that Subway tried to go after Sheetz Inc. convenience stores in Pennsylvania in 2009 for use of the word “footlong”—and they left that one empty-handed as well.

Given that neither Pochron or Subway had either offered comment or responded to the Casey’s lawsuit, maybe they’re taking a move out of MySubwayRewards.com’s playbook and figuring silence is golden. More to come.

Takes a Strong, Brave Man to File a Propecia Lawsuit

February 16th, 2011. By AbiK

Think about it. To step up to the plate and serve as lead plaintiff in a Propecia class action, a man’s got to bare his sole a bit. He’s got to come out of the proverbial closet on a few things. Well, two to be exact: male pattern baldness and sexual dysfunction. How many red-blooded men—in their prime mating years (i.e., their 20’s) would have the you-know-what’s to do that?

Enter Michael Miller of Vancouver. Maybe it’s the beer, cold weather, ‘BC bud’, or just the sheer sense of humor of our neighbors in the Great White North that brings a man—a young man—to lead a pack of over 80 Canadian men in charging Merck Frosst Canada with failing to adequately warn Canadians of the possible risks associated with taking Propecia. (By the way, Propecia is also known by another brand name, Proscar; both are the generic drug Finasteride.)

Miller is apparently quite open in sharing his tale of woe. Seems he was noticing some hair thinning going on (those of you who’ve been to your five or ten year high school reunion have no problem visualizing this). So Miller’s doctor put him on Proscar (Propecia). And about a month later, he experienced what’s possibly a twentysomething’s worst nightmare: he lost interest in sex.

According to the release put out by his law firm, Klein Lyons, Miller stated, “I lost my interest in sex and I felt anxious in social situations for no particular reason.” He also says that after stopping Proscar, the symptoms did not go away: “My sexual functioning has not recovered, I have seen specialists and have tried treatments but nothing has worked.”

All kdding about male prowess aside, it’s one thing to have adverse side effects from a drug and know that they are non-life-altering and circumstantial—that they’ll only be present during the Read the rest of this entry »