Will Baston Challenges Be Extended to Sexual Orientation?

During jury selection, litigants have two types of jury strikes: for cause and without cause. A potential juror can be struck from the jury panel for cause if he is proven to have a bias for or against a party. In addition, litigants may strike a number of potential jurors for no reason at all. Strikes for no reason are called peremptory strikes.

In 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court held that litigants can not exercise peremptory strikes if the sole reason for the exercise of the strike is based on race. In such cases, litigants must express a race neutral reason for the exercise of the strike. The process is called a Batson challenge after the name of the case, Batson v. Kentucky.

The reasoning of the Batson case has been extended to gender as well as race.

Currently, a California federal appeals court is considering extending the Batson holding to sexual orientation. The issue arose in a pharmecutical case involving AIDS medications. a lawyer for a large drug company sought to use a peremptory challenge to exclude a potential juror from the panel that appeared to be homosexual.

California state courts have extended Batson to sexual orientation for over a decade, but the same has not been extended in federal courts.

Complaint Accuses Hon. Edith Jones of Racial Discrimination

The New York Times (6/5, Bronner, Subscription Publication, 1.68M) reports, “A group of civil rights organizations and legal ethicists filed a complaint of misconduct against a senior federal judge on Tuesday, alleging that recent remarks of hers showed bias against minority groups and an inappropriate religious belief in the death penalty.” The Times continues, “The complaint, against Judge Edith H. Jones of Houston, who sits on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, asserts that at a speech at the University of Pennsylvania Law School in February she said that blacks and Hispanics were more prone than others to commit violent crimes and that a death sentence was a service to defendants because it allowed them to make peace with God. The complaint is signed by representatives of, among others, the League of United Latin American Citizens, the Texas Civil Rights Project and the Mexican Capital Legal Assistance Program and cites a number of people who attended the lecture.”

In short, I find these accusations unbelieveable. Judge Jones is an extremely talented and respected member of the judiciary. However, there needs to be a full investigation because there is no place for racial bias or even the appearance of racial bias on the judiciary.

Superstorm Sandy Related Lawsuits Being Filed Against Non-insurance Defendants

Superstorm Sandy has come to be known as a “once in a century” kind of storm that caused devastation to many unprepared people. With unique storms, come unique challenges. Most look to their flood and wind insurance to cover damages sustained in superstorms like Sandy. However, when insurance coverage is limited or unavailable or when you live in New York, a jurisdiction that is overly protective of insurance companies, storm victims have begun to look to others who may have been responsible for their loss. 

Lawyers are assisting Sandy victims bring claims against management companies and condominium boards for negligence related to the failure to take reasonable precautions in light of the storm.  Other lawsuits seek to hold building owners liable for breach of the warranty of habitability. Lawsuits of this nature are difficult because the law affords defendants in these types of claims with broad defenses such as the business judgment rule. The New York Law Journal has an article exploring the basis of these types of lawsuits and legal protections afforded the target defendants in these types of claims that is worth reading.

Adjusters the weak link in catastrophes

In a recent article published at caller.com, former Galveston lawmaker, A. R. "Babe" Schwartz is quoted as saying, "The weak link in it all always has been a lack of competent adjusters when a big storm hits."

Mr. Schwartz was commenting on his assessment for the failures of the Texas Windstorm Insurance Association to respond appropriately to policyholders after Hurricane Ike in 2008.

"When castrophe strikes the service deteriorates."

I concur in Mr. Schwartz assessment; however, I believe additional factors complicate successful claim resolution. These factors include non-field representative approval requirements and complicated casual factors intersecting with policy coverages and exclusions.

Within this mix, homeowners are fearful that their homes will not be repaired and adjusters are fearful that their superiors will accuse them of over paying the claim. This confluence of events often leads to delays that might not happen in ordinary times.

For Mr. Schwartz' full perspective and informed comments read the caller.com article

Hurricane Insurance Claim Limitation Periods

A lot of TV lawyers have taken out billboards around Houston claiming that limitations will soon run on Hurricane Ike claims. "The End is Near." Well, maybe... At best, the billboards are misleading.

Lawsuits may contain different causes of action. For example, in the insurance context, there are breach of contract claims, insurance code violations and breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. Each cause of action will have a separate period of limitations that may begin on separate time periods. While there are separate time periods for separate causes of action, you can only recover once for the same damages.

If you think you have an insurance claim, it is best to have an attorney review your facts and determine when the various statutes of limitation apply to your case.