During a five day period from June 5th through the 9th in 2001, Tropical Storm Allison dumped a huge amount of rainfall on the Houston metropolitan area that caused widespread and tremendously damaging flooding. The Port of Houston recorded 37 inches of rainfall over that five day period. With damage estimates exceeding $5 billion, Allison remains the costliest weather event in Houston’s history.
However, as bad as Allison was, it’s hard to imagine that this Indian monsoon hit Bombay with 37 inches of rain in one day as “the rainfall descended in what looked like a solid wall of water.”
Kelo ripples hit the Cowboys stadium project
As noted in this earlier post, the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Kelo v. City of New London inevitably will have ripples, including the use of government’s eminent domain power to increase the value of privately-owned professional sports franchises at the expense of private property owners.
Thus, it is not surprising that Arlington landowners have filed the first lawsuit over the City of Arlington’s use of its eminent domain power to seize the landowners’ land for the benefit of Jerry Jones and his Dallas Cowboys stadium project. The landowners contend that the stadium project — although tacitly owned by the City — is beneficially owned and certainly controlled by Mr. Jones through a long-term ground lease, and that using the government’s eminent domain power to take private property from one person and give it to another is unconstitutional. Sounds like Kelo II, doesn’t it?
A personal experience with Judge Roberts
Although I do not agree with the writer’s conclusion, this post tells a personal story about Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts, Jr. that reflects why he is one of my favorites for a spot on the Supreme Court and certainly will not result in this type of embarrassment. Hat tip to Craig Newmark for the link to the post on Judge Roberts.
The ubiquitous Mr. Lipton
When the Walt Disney Co. board needed advice regarding Comcast’s adverse takeover offer for Disney, who did the board call?
When Richard Grasso was negotiating with the New York Stock Exchange Board regarding his compensation package, who did he call?
And when the Morgan Stanley board was considering recently departed CEO Phillip Purcell and his cohort Stephen Crawford’s controversial exit pay packages, who did the Morgan board call?
Martin Lipton, that’s who. This NY Times article profiles the longtime New York merger and acquisitions specialist, who is famous in corporate legal circles for having refined the use of the poison pill anti-takeover strategy. The article is an interesting read on one of the legal profession’s real heavyweights.
As an aside, Mr. Lipton’s place in Texas legal history was cemented back in 1985 when his testimony on behalf of his client Texaco was one of the main reasons that jurors awarded $11 billion to Pennzoil during Pennzoil’s famous lawsuit against Texaco over Pennzoil’s failed bid for Getty Oil. After filing a historic chapter 11 case to avoid paying the resulting judgment, Texaco settled the Pennzoil judgment for $3 billion in 1987, insuring Houston plaintiff’s lawyer Joe Jamail’s place among Texas’ richest lawyers.
Groundhog Day in the airline industry
Reviewing BP’s responsibilities
As if the fatal blast at its Texas City plant earlier this year (for which it has already admitted liability) and the listing of its huge Thunder Horse drilling platform was not enough, British Petroleum executives wake up today to a front page Wall Street Journal ($) article that reports that the OSHA investigation into the blast has discovered that it was only the latest in a series of major “incidents” at the Texas City plant over the past 16 months, including a September 2004 accident in which two BP employees were scalded to death while removing a valve from a hot-water line and a big March 2004 fire that did not result in any deaths.
Behind the motto “Beyond Petroleum,” BP has been one of the corporate leaders in promoting an image of social responsibility, a topic on which Professor Ribstein has written and commented extensively. For example, BP CEO John Browne has been a mainstream media darling for advocating reduction of global warming by lowering carbon-dioxide emissions at BP facilities. Now, against a backdrop of cost cuts and old equipment at its Texas City refinery, plaintiffs’ attorneys in the wrongful death and personal injury lawsuits resulting from the Texas City blast are planning on portraying BP’s social responsibility agenda as merely a public relations ruse to cover-up its business practice of exposing refinery workers to grave danger. BP announced a $700 million charge against earnings earlier this week to cover its projected liability related to the lawsuits.
Isn’t it interesting how even seemingly innocuous corporate policies have a way of backfiring when they stray too far afield from the basic corporate purpose of maximizing shareholder value?
Apple stories
The ever informative Dwight Silverman informs us that the new Apple Store is opening this weekend in The Woodlands. Given the spirit of the typical Mac user, Dwight points out that you may want to allow the initial stampede to recede before venturing over to do some serious shopping.
By the way, speaking of Apple, you can rest assured that Ken Leebow will not be one of the shoppers at an Apple Store anytime soon!
Bidg and Berkman
In the Stros romp over the Phillies last night, Craig Biggio and Lance Berkman hit back-to-back home runs twice, once in the first inning and then again in the third. By the way, in case you hadn’t noticed, the Stros are 52-47, in 2nd place in the NL Central 10 1/2 games back of St. Louis, only 3 games behind in the Wild Card race, and have won 8 out of their last 10 games.
Bidg and Berkman are — along with injured teammate, Jeff Bagwell — among a small group of Stros players who are legitimate candidates for Baseball’s Hall of Fame. The rare feat of homering back-to-back twice in one game gives me an opportunity to pass along the following career and recent season statistics for both Bidg and Berkman:
Not looking good for Merck
In the ongoing wrongful death civil trial against Merck involving its pain reliever drug Vioxx, the mainstream media tends to focus on seemingly important expert testimony such as that described in this article.
Being more a student of the courtroom, however, I tend to focus in such trials on jury dynamics, such as those described in this Fortune Magazine article:
Speaking in state court in Angleton, Texas, without notes and in gloriously plain English, and accompanying nearly every point with imaginative, easily understood (if often hokey) slides and overhead projections, (plaintiff’s lawyer Mark) Lanier, a part-time Baptist preacher, took on Merck and its former CEO Ray Gilmartin with merciless, spellbinding savagery . . .
But in contrast to Lanier . . . (Merck defense lawyer David Kiernan) seemed to read much of his presentation and illustrated it only with stodgy, corporate headshots of Merck officials or hard-to-read excerpts from documents whose meaning was shrouded in medical jargon . . .
The trial offers jurors a stark choice between accepting Lanier’s invitation to believe simple, alluring and emotionally cathartic stories versus Merck’s appeals to colorless, heavy-going, soporific Reason.
H’mm. On one hand, an interesting story told through a lively presentation given without notes using colorful images. On the other hand, a bland recitation of prepared remarks given with boring images of hard-to-read text in documents.
Translated: This is not looking good for Merck.
The essential problem with third party payor health care finance
This outstanding Washington Post article (first in a series of three) on Medicare nails the key problem with reliance on third party payor health care finance systems:
In Medicare’s upside-down reimbursement system, hospitals and doctors who order unnecessary tests, provide poor care or even injure patients often receive higher payments than those who provide efficient, high-quality medicine. . .
Researchers at Dartmouth Medical School, who have been studying Medicare’s performance for three decades, estimate that as much as $1 of every $3 is wasted on unnecessary or inappropriate care. Other analysts put the figure as high as 40 percent.
Medicare has difficulty controlling waste because of deficiencies in the way it monitors and enforces quality standards. Its oversight system is fragmented, underfunded and marred by conflicts of interest, records and interviews show . . .
Read the entire article, including the sidebar containing related articles and graphs and the subsequent articles here and here. It’s a first rate series.
