From: rdshatt@aol.com
To: MEROWLEY@gsblaw.com
CC: andrew@hbsslaw.com, jkaren@jonesday.com, dlhoran@jonesday.com, neal.mccarthy@fairmountpartners.com, Carla.walsh@mac.com, laura.dorris@kingcounty.gov
Sent: 1/2/2010 6:31:41 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Re: In re EXPEDIA HOTEL TAXES AND FEES LITIGATION
Dear Ms. Sibley,
Thank you for sending me your notice of appeal that you are filing in King County Superior Court.
For your information, I have expressed objection both within the litigation and outside the litigation. You may learn more of what I have done at this link .
Based on personal experience in this case and others (see, e.g.
Papadakis v. Northwestern Mutual Life ), I believe this is a closed legal system in which the judges and the lawyers are out of touch with economics, business ethics and genuine justice.
Because of my belief about the closed nature of the legal system, as exemplified by this case, I am availing of the upcoming 2010 elections to go outside the legal system even more, which you may learn about here in my blog. I hope to hold up the Expedia litigation as a case in point for my criticism.
I would be interested in learning more about your views on this subject matter.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
In a message dated 12/28/2009 11:32:50 A.M. Central Standard Time, MEROWLEY@gsblaw.com writes:
Please find attached a Notice of Appeal to Court of Appeals, Division I with attachments filed today in King County Superior Court.
This e-mail is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). It contains information that is confidential and/or legally privileged. If you believe that it has been sent to you in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the message. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this information by someone other than the intended recipient is prohibited.
MARILYN ROWLEY
merowley@gsblaw.com
Showing posts with label J8. Expedia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label J8. Expedia. Show all posts
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Washington State federal legislators and candidates
I used this website http://www.uselections.com/wa/wa.htm to send the below email to Washington State's United States Senators and Representatives and to announced candidates for those offices in the 2010 elections.
From: RDShatt
To: ________
Sent: 12/9/2009 ______.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Plaintiffs' lawyers and economic recovery in Washington State
Dear __________,
I think that plaintiffs' lawyers and their activities are an impediment to economic recovery, are an obstacle to health care cost reduction, and undermine business ethics.
I am an Alabama resident who has objected in a class action lawsuit against Expedia, Inc. that is pending in the King County Superior Court. The past several days I have sent the below form of emails to county commissioners and to Superior Court judges in Washington State in which I am highly critical of the settlement agreement approved by the judge in the Expedia case and argue that action is needed to be taken against the plaintiffs' lawyers as a source of the country's health care cost problems and by reason of how they impair economic recovery, job creation and government revenue raising.
I am writing you this email for you to consider in your position as a high level elected official in Washington State and/or as candidate for the same, and to try to make the same an issue in the next election.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
[form of email to county commissioners and county council members]
From: RDShatt
To: _______@co._____.wa.us
Sent: 12/8/2009 ________.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Email to ________ County Judges
Dear Commissioner _________,
I am a resident of the State of Alabama and I have sent the below email to your county's Superior Court judge(s) and other Washington State Superior Court judges.
Why am I bothering to tell you this?
Our country is struggling to get out of an extremely bad recession; our federal, state and local lawmakers are contemplating more job stimulus programs, finding ways to reduce health care costs, and other additional governmental action, to try get our economy back on track; further, governments are desperate for revenues to cover large budget shortfalls.
You have something in your backyard you should take a look at. You can begin to do so by reading the below email to the Superior Court judges. It is specifically about a $9,500,000 mindless waste of funds that one Washington State Superior Court judge has sanctioned (which waste of economic resources is significantly greater that the stated $9,500,000 amount), and that judges around the country are multiplying thousands of times over. These amounts go to line the pockets of persons (plaintiffs' lawyers) who use their resources to block sensible medical malpractice reform (and the health care cost reductions that can come from that) and who otherwise broadly propagate activities that are an indefensible tax and exaction on business that impedes the economic recovery and job creation, which in turn keeps your government from getting revenues it needs.
You may not be a federal or state lawmaker or a judge who can do something directly about the plaintiffs' lawyers but you are a local official who can be informed about the burdens they place on the economy, on business recovery, and on your government getting needed revenues. You are in a position to register your views with state legislators and judges and other local persons of influence with whom you come in contact.
I, as a citizen, am complaining strenuously against the attempted governmental takeover of health care that will increase health care costs and will impair economic recovery and also against the trillions of dollars of increased government spending and debilitating tax increases in the name of stimulus that have taken place or that are in the works. While I am complaining about those, I want to complain about why action is not being taken against the plaintiffs' lawyers as a source of the country's health care cost problems and how they impair economic recovery and job creation and government revenue raising.
I hope you agree with my views and will register your own accordingly.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
[Form of email sent December 3rd and 4th to Washington State Superior Court judges]
From: RDShatt
To: ______________Sent: 12/__/2009 _______.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Email to Judge Benton
Dear Judge _____,
I think the below email to Judge Benton is self-explanatory of why I am sending you a copy of the email. I hope you will give due consideration to the points I make in the email and perhaps discuss the same with other judges in Washington State.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShattTo: laura.dorris@kingcounty.govCC: neal.mccarthy@__________, jkaren@jonesday.com, steve@hbsslaw.comSent: 12/3/2009 7:21:56 A.M. Central Standard TimeSubj: Continued complaint about Expedia class action litigation
Dear Judge Benton,
Plaintiffs' counsel has sent me your signed Order Awarding Attorneys' Fees, Costs and Incentive Awards in In re Expedia Taxes and Fees Litigation, in which you awarded the plaintiffs' counsel $9,587,096.11, which includes $412,903.89 in expenses.
In August I sent these two emails to you that your bailiff indicated were reviewed by you and would be made part of the file: http://robertshattuck.blogspot.com/2009/08/email-to-judge-benton.html and http://robertshattuck.blogspot.com/2009/08/second-email-to-judge-benton.html .
I have read your order and the justification you set out for the attorneys' fees.
With all due respect, your Honor, I consider your order to be a mindless action based on either mindless actions of other judges previously (I have not studied the cases you cite so I cannot say whether they were mindless as well) or, if the actions of the other judges were not mindless, you failed to see why you were being mindless in how you followed those precedents in the Expedia litigation.
I have been disseminating this citizen's letter to judges and feel the Expedia litigation in the King County Superior Court is an appropriate opportunity for disseminating my citizen's letter to judges at other Superior Courts in Washington State. I see from the Washington courts website that there are email addresses for emailing to judges at other Superior Courts, and I plan to send to them copies of this email to you.
I would like further to call this matter to the attention of Washington State state legislators, such as the judiciary committees. While I am not a citizen of Washington State, class action litigation such as the Expedia case has an effect nationally on consumers and investors, and I believe it should be permissible for out of state citizens to point that out to other state legislatures.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: ________
Sent: 12/9/2009 ______.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Plaintiffs' lawyers and economic recovery in Washington State
Dear __________,
I think that plaintiffs' lawyers and their activities are an impediment to economic recovery, are an obstacle to health care cost reduction, and undermine business ethics.
I am an Alabama resident who has objected in a class action lawsuit against Expedia, Inc. that is pending in the King County Superior Court. The past several days I have sent the below form of emails to county commissioners and to Superior Court judges in Washington State in which I am highly critical of the settlement agreement approved by the judge in the Expedia case and argue that action is needed to be taken against the plaintiffs' lawyers as a source of the country's health care cost problems and by reason of how they impair economic recovery, job creation and government revenue raising.
I am writing you this email for you to consider in your position as a high level elected official in Washington State and/or as candidate for the same, and to try to make the same an issue in the next election.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
[form of email to county commissioners and county council members]
From: RDShatt
To: _______@co._____.wa.us
Sent: 12/8/2009 ________.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Email to ________ County Judges
Dear Commissioner _________,
I am a resident of the State of Alabama and I have sent the below email to your county's Superior Court judge(s) and other Washington State Superior Court judges.
Why am I bothering to tell you this?
Our country is struggling to get out of an extremely bad recession; our federal, state and local lawmakers are contemplating more job stimulus programs, finding ways to reduce health care costs, and other additional governmental action, to try get our economy back on track; further, governments are desperate for revenues to cover large budget shortfalls.
You have something in your backyard you should take a look at. You can begin to do so by reading the below email to the Superior Court judges. It is specifically about a $9,500,000 mindless waste of funds that one Washington State Superior Court judge has sanctioned (which waste of economic resources is significantly greater that the stated $9,500,000 amount), and that judges around the country are multiplying thousands of times over. These amounts go to line the pockets of persons (plaintiffs' lawyers) who use their resources to block sensible medical malpractice reform (and the health care cost reductions that can come from that) and who otherwise broadly propagate activities that are an indefensible tax and exaction on business that impedes the economic recovery and job creation, which in turn keeps your government from getting revenues it needs.
You may not be a federal or state lawmaker or a judge who can do something directly about the plaintiffs' lawyers but you are a local official who can be informed about the burdens they place on the economy, on business recovery, and on your government getting needed revenues. You are in a position to register your views with state legislators and judges and other local persons of influence with whom you come in contact.
I, as a citizen, am complaining strenuously against the attempted governmental takeover of health care that will increase health care costs and will impair economic recovery and also against the trillions of dollars of increased government spending and debilitating tax increases in the name of stimulus that have taken place or that are in the works. While I am complaining about those, I want to complain about why action is not being taken against the plaintiffs' lawyers as a source of the country's health care cost problems and how they impair economic recovery and job creation and government revenue raising.
I hope you agree with my views and will register your own accordingly.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
[Form of email sent December 3rd and 4th to Washington State Superior Court judges]
From: RDShatt
To: ______________Sent: 12/__/2009 _______.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Email to Judge Benton
Dear Judge _____,
I think the below email to Judge Benton is self-explanatory of why I am sending you a copy of the email. I hope you will give due consideration to the points I make in the email and perhaps discuss the same with other judges in Washington State.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShattTo: laura.dorris@kingcounty.govCC: neal.mccarthy@__________, jkaren@jonesday.com, steve@hbsslaw.comSent: 12/3/2009 7:21:56 A.M. Central Standard TimeSubj: Continued complaint about Expedia class action litigation
Dear Judge Benton,
Plaintiffs' counsel has sent me your signed Order Awarding Attorneys' Fees, Costs and Incentive Awards in In re Expedia Taxes and Fees Litigation, in which you awarded the plaintiffs' counsel $9,587,096.11, which includes $412,903.89 in expenses.
In August I sent these two emails to you that your bailiff indicated were reviewed by you and would be made part of the file: http://robertshattuck.blogspot.com/2009/08/email-to-judge-benton.html and http://robertshattuck.blogspot.com/2009/08/second-email-to-judge-benton.html .
I have read your order and the justification you set out for the attorneys' fees.
With all due respect, your Honor, I consider your order to be a mindless action based on either mindless actions of other judges previously (I have not studied the cases you cite so I cannot say whether they were mindless as well) or, if the actions of the other judges were not mindless, you failed to see why you were being mindless in how you followed those precedents in the Expedia litigation.
I have been disseminating this citizen's letter to judges and feel the Expedia litigation in the King County Superior Court is an appropriate opportunity for disseminating my citizen's letter to judges at other Superior Courts in Washington State. I see from the Washington courts website that there are email addresses for emailing to judges at other Superior Courts, and I plan to send to them copies of this email to you.
I would like further to call this matter to the attention of Washington State state legislators, such as the judiciary committees. While I am not a citizen of Washington State, class action litigation such as the Expedia case has an effect nationally on consumers and investors, and I believe it should be permissible for out of state citizens to point that out to other state legislatures.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
Monday, December 7, 2009
Washington State Superior Court judges
I used the email addresses I found by means of the links on this webpage http://www.courts.wa.gov/court_dir/?fa=court_dir.county in order to send last Thursday and Friday the below email to almost all the Washington State Superior Court judges.
From: RDShatt
To: ____________
Sent: 12/__/2009 _______ Central Standard Time
Subj: Email to Judge Benton
Dear Judge ____________,
I think the below email to Judge Benton is self-explanatory of why I am sending you a copy of the email. I hope you will give due consideration to the points I make in the email and perhaps discuss the same with other judges in Washington State.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: laura.dorris@kingcounty.gov
CC: neal.mccarthy@_________, jkaren@jonesday.com, steve@hbsslaw.com
Sent: 12/3/2009 7:21:56 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Continued complaint about Expedia class action litigation
Dear Judge Benton,
Plaintiffs' counsel has sent me your signed Order Awarding Attorneys' Fees, Costs and Incentive Awards in In re Expedia Taxes and Fees Litigation, in which you awarded the plaintiffs' counsel $9,587,096.11, which includes $412,903.89 in expenses.
In August I sent these two emails to you that your bailiff indicated were reviewed by you and would be made part of the file: http://robertshattuck.blogspot.com/2009/08/email-to-judge-benton.html and http://robertshattuck.blogspot.com/2009/08/second-email-to-judge-benton.html .
I have read your order and the justification you set out for the attorneys' fees.
With all due respect, your Honor, I consider your order to be a mindless action based on either mindless actions of other judges previously (I have not studied the cases you cite so I cannot say whether they were mindless as well) or, if the actions of the other judges were not mindless, you failed to see why you were being mindless in how you followed those precedents in the Expedia litigation.
I have been disseminating this citizen's letter to judges and feel the Expedia litigation in the King County Superior Court is an appropriate opportunity for disseminating my citizen's letter to judges at other Superior Courts in Washington State. I see from the Washington courts website that there are email addresses for emailing to judges at other Superior Courts, and I plan to send to them copies of this email to you.
I would like further to call this matter to the attention of Washington State state legislators, such as the judiciary committees. While I am not a citizen of Washington State, class action litigation such as the Expedia case has an effect nationally on consumers and investors, and I believe it should be permissible for out of state citizens to point that out to other state legislatures.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: ____________
Sent: 12/__/2009 _______ Central Standard Time
Subj: Email to Judge Benton
Dear Judge ____________,
I think the below email to Judge Benton is self-explanatory of why I am sending you a copy of the email. I hope you will give due consideration to the points I make in the email and perhaps discuss the same with other judges in Washington State.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: laura.dorris@kingcounty.gov
CC: neal.mccarthy@_________, jkaren@jonesday.com, steve@hbsslaw.com
Sent: 12/3/2009 7:21:56 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Continued complaint about Expedia class action litigation
Dear Judge Benton,
Plaintiffs' counsel has sent me your signed Order Awarding Attorneys' Fees, Costs and Incentive Awards in In re Expedia Taxes and Fees Litigation, in which you awarded the plaintiffs' counsel $9,587,096.11, which includes $412,903.89 in expenses.
In August I sent these two emails to you that your bailiff indicated were reviewed by you and would be made part of the file: http://robertshattuck.blogspot.com/2009/08/email-to-judge-benton.html and http://robertshattuck.blogspot.com/2009/08/second-email-to-judge-benton.html .
I have read your order and the justification you set out for the attorneys' fees.
With all due respect, your Honor, I consider your order to be a mindless action based on either mindless actions of other judges previously (I have not studied the cases you cite so I cannot say whether they were mindless as well) or, if the actions of the other judges were not mindless, you failed to see why you were being mindless in how you followed those precedents in the Expedia litigation.
I have been disseminating this citizen's letter to judges and feel the Expedia litigation in the King County Superior Court is an appropriate opportunity for disseminating my citizen's letter to judges at other Superior Courts in Washington State. I see from the Washington courts website that there are email addresses for emailing to judges at other Superior Courts, and I plan to send to them copies of this email to you.
I would like further to call this matter to the attention of Washington State state legislators, such as the judiciary committees. While I am not a citizen of Washington State, class action litigation such as the Expedia case has an effect nationally on consumers and investors, and I believe it should be permissible for out of state citizens to point that out to other state legislatures.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Another email to Judge Benton
From: RDShatt
To: laura.dorris@kingcounty.gov
CC: neal.mccarthy@__________, jkaren@jonesday.com, steve@hbsslaw.com
Sent: 12/3/2009 7:21:56 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Continued complaint about Expedia class action litigation
Dear Judge Benton,
Plaintiffs' counsel has sent me your signed Order Awarding Attorneys' Fees, Costs and Incentive Awards in In re Expedia Taxes and Fees Litigation, in which you awarded the plaintiffs' counsel $9,587,096.11, which includes $412,903.89 in expenses.
In August I sent these two emails to you that your bailiff indicated were reviewed by you and would be made part of the file: http://robertshattuck.blogspot.com/2009/08/email-to-judge-benton.html and http://robertshattuck.blogspot.com/2009/08/second-email-to-judge-benton.html .
I have read your order and the justification you set out for the attorneys' fees.
With all due respect, your Honor, I consider your order to be a mindless action based on either mindless actions of other judges previously (I have not studied the cases you cite so I cannot say whether they were mindless as well) or, if the actions of the other judges were not mindless, you failed to see why you were being mindless in how you followed those precedents in the Expedia litigation.
I have been disseminating this citizen's letter to judges and feel the Expedia litigation in the King County Superior Court is an appropriate opportunity for disseminating my citizen's letter to judges at other Superior Courts in Washington State. I see from the Washington courts website that there are email addresses for emailing to judges at other Superior Courts, and I plan to send to them copies of this email to you.
I would like further to call this matter to the attention of Washington State state legislators, such as the judiciary committees. While I am not a citizen of Washington State, class action litigation such as the Expedia case has an effect nationally on consumers and investors, and I believe it should be permissible for out of state citizens to point that out to other state legislatures.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
To: laura.dorris@kingcounty.gov
CC: neal.mccarthy@__________, jkaren@jonesday.com, steve@hbsslaw.com
Sent: 12/3/2009 7:21:56 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Continued complaint about Expedia class action litigation
Dear Judge Benton,
Plaintiffs' counsel has sent me your signed Order Awarding Attorneys' Fees, Costs and Incentive Awards in In re Expedia Taxes and Fees Litigation, in which you awarded the plaintiffs' counsel $9,587,096.11, which includes $412,903.89 in expenses.
In August I sent these two emails to you that your bailiff indicated were reviewed by you and would be made part of the file: http://robertshattuck.blogspot.com/2009/08/email-to-judge-benton.html and http://robertshattuck.blogspot.com/2009/08/second-email-to-judge-benton.html .
I have read your order and the justification you set out for the attorneys' fees.
With all due respect, your Honor, I consider your order to be a mindless action based on either mindless actions of other judges previously (I have not studied the cases you cite so I cannot say whether they were mindless as well) or, if the actions of the other judges were not mindless, you failed to see why you were being mindless in how you followed those precedents in the Expedia litigation.
I have been disseminating this citizen's letter to judges and feel the Expedia litigation in the King County Superior Court is an appropriate opportunity for disseminating my citizen's letter to judges at other Superior Courts in Washington State. I see from the Washington courts website that there are email addresses for emailing to judges at other Superior Courts, and I plan to send to them copies of this email to you.
I would like further to call this matter to the attention of Washington State state legislators, such as the judiciary committees. While I am not a citizen of Washington State, class action litigation such as the Expedia case has an effect nationally on consumers and investors, and I believe it should be permissible for out of state citizens to point that out to other state legislatures.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Some dialogue on Expedia
From: Dawn@hbsslaw.com
To: neal.mccarthy@________, RDShatt@aol.com, Carla.walsh@mac.com
Sent: 11/20/2009 6:40:54 P.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: FW: In re Expedia (WA)
Attached please find all documents filed today in connection with Plainitffs' Motion for Final Approval of Settlement, etc.:
<<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>>
From: neal.mccarthy@__________
To: Dawn@hbsslaw.com, RDShatt@aol.com, Carla.walsh@mac.com
Sent: 11/22/2009 8:11:47 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: RE: In re Expedia (WA)
Thanks Dawn
Your firm is a collection of blood sucking maggots -
Please let Mr Volk and your other partners know that class action suits like this are a tax upon the patience and virtue of the good people of our country
I suggest they find a more noble way of manipulating the legal system, such as chasing ambulances.
Regards
Neal McCarthy,
Managing Director
From: RDShatt
To: neal.mccarthy@_____________
CC: Dawn@hbsslaw.com, Carla.walsh@mac.com
Sent: 11/22/2009 8:22:40 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Re: In re Expedia (WA)
Way to go Neal!
I hope you are aware of my efforts to combat the maggots (see this link How To Combat Plaintiffs' Lawyers ), including trying to combat them on Expedia (see http://robertshattuck.blogspot.com/search/label/J8.%20Expedia).
Do you mind if I reproduce your email on my blog and make other use of it?
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Rob Shattuck
From: neal.mccarthy@__________
To: RDShatt@aol.com
CC: Dawn@hbsslaw.com, Carla.walsh@mac.com
Sent: 11/22/2009 8:37:32 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: RE: In re Expedia (WA)
Happy to have you share my opinion and name, but please don’t provide my firm name, phone number or email – I have too many emails to answer every day.
I have been asked over the years to participate in numerous lawsuits like this and have steadfastly refused, and offered to assist the attorneys for the defendants, as I did in this case.
The silliest such suit which attempted to include me was a class action against the record company that produced albums for 80’s pop band “Milli Vanilli” – the class was suing on the basis that the music videos were done by actors/dancers who had not actually sung the songs. The settlement was a coupon for something like $1 off any album by the record company and the plaintiff’s counsel was pocketing millions for the “valuable aid to the victims of Milli Vanilli”.
This is the lowest and most coercive use of the legal process, and I have written Senators, Congressmen and the White house trying to put controls in place, but the plaintiff’s bar contributes heavily.
I was pleased to see the hypocrisy of this group exposed when John Edwards embarrassed himself and the Democratic party.
Neal McCarthy
Managing Director
From: RDShatt
To: Dawn@hbsslaw.com
CC: Carla.walsh@mac.com, neal.mccarthy@__________
Sent: 11/22/2009 9:03:03 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Fwd: In re Expedia (WA)
Dear Dawn,
I will be making use of Neal's views and opinions on my blog. If there is anything your firm would like to say in defense of itself and its work, I am likely to be willing to post your firm's statement on my blog. Just let me hear from you.
Thanks.
Rob Shattuck
To: neal.mccarthy@________, RDShatt@aol.com, Carla.walsh@mac.com
Sent: 11/20/2009 6:40:54 P.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: FW: In re Expedia (WA)
Attached please find all documents filed today in connection with Plainitffs' Motion for Final Approval of Settlement, etc.:
<<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>> <<11-20-09>>
From: neal.mccarthy@__________
To: Dawn@hbsslaw.com, RDShatt@aol.com, Carla.walsh@mac.com
Sent: 11/22/2009 8:11:47 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: RE: In re Expedia (WA)
Thanks Dawn
Your firm is a collection of blood sucking maggots -
Please let Mr Volk and your other partners know that class action suits like this are a tax upon the patience and virtue of the good people of our country
I suggest they find a more noble way of manipulating the legal system, such as chasing ambulances.
Regards
Neal McCarthy,
Managing Director
From: RDShatt
To: neal.mccarthy@_____________
CC: Dawn@hbsslaw.com, Carla.walsh@mac.com
Sent: 11/22/2009 8:22:40 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Re: In re Expedia (WA)
Way to go Neal!
I hope you are aware of my efforts to combat the maggots (see this link How To Combat Plaintiffs' Lawyers ), including trying to combat them on Expedia (see http://robertshattuck.blogspot.com/search/label/J8.%20Expedia).
Do you mind if I reproduce your email on my blog and make other use of it?
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Rob Shattuck
From: neal.mccarthy@__________
To: RDShatt@aol.com
CC: Dawn@hbsslaw.com, Carla.walsh@mac.com
Sent: 11/22/2009 8:37:32 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: RE: In re Expedia (WA)
Happy to have you share my opinion and name, but please don’t provide my firm name, phone number or email – I have too many emails to answer every day.
I have been asked over the years to participate in numerous lawsuits like this and have steadfastly refused, and offered to assist the attorneys for the defendants, as I did in this case.
The silliest such suit which attempted to include me was a class action against the record company that produced albums for 80’s pop band “Milli Vanilli” – the class was suing on the basis that the music videos were done by actors/dancers who had not actually sung the songs. The settlement was a coupon for something like $1 off any album by the record company and the plaintiff’s counsel was pocketing millions for the “valuable aid to the victims of Milli Vanilli”.
This is the lowest and most coercive use of the legal process, and I have written Senators, Congressmen and the White house trying to put controls in place, but the plaintiff’s bar contributes heavily.
I was pleased to see the hypocrisy of this group exposed when John Edwards embarrassed himself and the Democratic party.
Neal McCarthy
Managing Director
From: RDShatt
To: Dawn@hbsslaw.com
CC: Carla.walsh@mac.com, neal.mccarthy@__________
Sent: 11/22/2009 9:03:03 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Fwd: In re Expedia (WA)
Dear Dawn,
I will be making use of Neal's views and opinions on my blog. If there is anything your firm would like to say in defense of itself and its work, I am likely to be willing to post your firm's statement on my blog. Just let me hear from you.
Thanks.
Rob Shattuck
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Chambers of commerce
From: RDShatt
To: garyc@awb.org
Sent: 9/2/2009 7:13:01 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: I want to contact WA state legislators and attorney general
Dear Mr. Chandler,
I am a citizens' class action objector.
The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website. I have sent emails to the judge in the case, which you may read here.
In addition to the judge, I also wish to contact appropriate Washington state legislators and the attorney general's office in order to advance some of my contentions to those officials and to urge them to adopt positions and possibly take actions that incorporate my contentions.
I am not a resident of Washington State, and it can be very difficult, if not impossible, to get a state official to read a letter or an email from a non-resident, non-Washington State voter.
I am writing this email to you to inquire whether there is any way the Chamber could give me a reference to one or more Washington state legislators (or legislative assistants) or to a staff member or members in the Washington attorney general's office, to whom I could direct communications that I desire to make to those officials.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: GaryC@AWB.ORG
To: RDShatt@aol.com
Sent: 9/3/2009 1:36:06 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: RE: I want to contact WA state legislators and attorney general
If you go onto the web and go to access Washington, you can get the information of contacts in the Attorney General’s Office..
From: RDShatt
To: GaryC@AWB.ORG
Sent: 9/3/2009 6:13:23 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Re: I want to contact WA state legislators and attorney general
Dear Mr. Chandler,
Thank you very much for replying. I think I will continue looking for an organization or person who is local to Washington State and who has sufficient interest in the subject matter and the advocacy that I wish to make to Washington legislators and the Attorney General that they are willing to provide me a reference. Without such a reference, I am sure I, not being a resident of Washington, will be entirely disregarded in trying to communicate to Washington legislators and the attorney general.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
To: garyc@awb.org
Sent: 9/2/2009 7:13:01 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: I want to contact WA state legislators and attorney general
Dear Mr. Chandler,
I am a citizens' class action objector.
The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website. I have sent emails to the judge in the case, which you may read here.
In addition to the judge, I also wish to contact appropriate Washington state legislators and the attorney general's office in order to advance some of my contentions to those officials and to urge them to adopt positions and possibly take actions that incorporate my contentions.
I am not a resident of Washington State, and it can be very difficult, if not impossible, to get a state official to read a letter or an email from a non-resident, non-Washington State voter.
I am writing this email to you to inquire whether there is any way the Chamber could give me a reference to one or more Washington state legislators (or legislative assistants) or to a staff member or members in the Washington attorney general's office, to whom I could direct communications that I desire to make to those officials.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: GaryC@AWB.ORG
To: RDShatt@aol.com
Sent: 9/3/2009 1:36:06 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: RE: I want to contact WA state legislators and attorney general
If you go onto the web and go to access Washington, you can get the information of contacts in the Attorney General’s Office..
From: RDShatt
To: GaryC@AWB.ORG
Sent: 9/3/2009 6:13:23 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Re: I want to contact WA state legislators and attorney general
Dear Mr. Chandler,
Thank you very much for replying. I think I will continue looking for an organization or person who is local to Washington State and who has sufficient interest in the subject matter and the advocacy that I wish to make to Washington legislators and the Attorney General that they are willing to provide me a reference. Without such a reference, I am sure I, not being a resident of Washington, will be entirely disregarded in trying to communicate to Washington legislators and the attorney general.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
Local law students
From: RDShatt
To: sulawrev@seattleu.edu
Sent: 9/3/2009 5:25:37 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Mr. Prince,
I doubt this is ripe for a law review article or note, but I thought I would pass it on for your consideration.
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
To repeat, I doubt this is ripe for a law review article or note, but I thought I would pass it on for your consideration. If you see any Seattle University Law Review potential here, I would be very interested in hearing from you.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: dhancock@washlrev.org
Sent: 9/3/2009 5:37:49 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Mr. Hancock,
I doubt this is ripe for a law review article or note, but I thought I would pass it on for your consideration.
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
To repeat, I doubt this is ripe for a law review article or note, but I thought I would pass it on for your consideration. If you see any Washington Law Review potential here, I would be very interested in hearing from you.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: bingisse@u.washington.edu
Sent: 9/3/2009 5:48:18 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Federalist Society: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Mr. Bingisser,
I am sending you this email to inform you about the above matter and issues I am raising about it, because I think they fall with the domain of interest of The Federalist Society and they may be grist for consideration and debate by the Society.
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
I hope this email has provided you something of interest for The Federalist Society.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: mwa2010@u.washington.edu
Sent: 9/3/2009 5:58:15 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: FLP: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Mr. Anderson,
I am sending you this email to inform you about the above matter and issues I am raising about it, because I think they could provide a very interesting topic for The Forum on Law and Policy..
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
I hope this email has provided you something that you will consider as a topic for The Forum on Law and Policy..
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
To: sulawrev@seattleu.edu
Sent: 9/3/2009 5:25:37 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Mr. Prince,
I doubt this is ripe for a law review article or note, but I thought I would pass it on for your consideration.
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
To repeat, I doubt this is ripe for a law review article or note, but I thought I would pass it on for your consideration. If you see any Seattle University Law Review potential here, I would be very interested in hearing from you.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: dhancock@washlrev.org
Sent: 9/3/2009 5:37:49 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Mr. Hancock,
I doubt this is ripe for a law review article or note, but I thought I would pass it on for your consideration.
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
To repeat, I doubt this is ripe for a law review article or note, but I thought I would pass it on for your consideration. If you see any Washington Law Review potential here, I would be very interested in hearing from you.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: bingisse@u.washington.edu
Sent: 9/3/2009 5:48:18 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Federalist Society: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Mr. Bingisser,
I am sending you this email to inform you about the above matter and issues I am raising about it, because I think they fall with the domain of interest of The Federalist Society and they may be grist for consideration and debate by the Society.
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
I hope this email has provided you something of interest for The Federalist Society.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: mwa2010@u.washington.edu
Sent: 9/3/2009 5:58:15 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: FLP: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Mr. Anderson,
I am sending you this email to inform you about the above matter and issues I am raising about it, because I think they could provide a very interesting topic for The Forum on Law and Policy..
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
I hope this email has provided you something that you will consider as a topic for The Forum on Law and Policy..
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
Seeking to interest local professors
From: RDShatt
To: heyscott@u.washington.edu
Sent: 8/28/2009 11:02:13 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Seeking business ethics expert regarding Expedia class action lawsuit
Dear Professor Reynolds,
I am writing this email to you because you are a professor of business ethics at the University of Washington and because of a certain class action lawsuit that is pending in King County against one of Washington's leading corporations Expedia, and that is described at Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
I believe that class action litigation such as that pending against Expedia undermines business ethics. My argumentation in support of this contention is set forth at length in this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?
I am trying to find a business ethics expert in the Seattle area who would be interested in joining with me in making a submission to the King County court judge that would argue how the class action lawsuit against Expedia the judge is overseeing undermines business ethics and is counterproductive to promoting ethical corporate behavior.
Would you be interested?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: dienharj@seattleu.edu
Sent: 8/28/2009 11:16:32 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Seeking business ethics expert regarding Expedia class action lawsuit
Dear Professor Dienhart,
I am writing this email to you because you are a professor of business ethics at Seattle University and because of a certain class action lawsuit that is pending in King County against one of Washington's leading corporations Expedia, and that is described at Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
I believe that class action litigation such as that pending against Expedia undermines business ethics. My argumentation in support of this contention is set forth at length in this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?
I am trying to find a business ethics expert in the Seattle area who would be interested in joining with me in making a submission to the King County court judge that would argue how the class action lawsuit against Expedia the judge is overseeing undermines business ethics and is counterproductive to promoting ethical corporate behavior.
Would you be interested?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: cohenm@seattleu.edu
Sent: 8/28/2009 11:36:51 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Seeking business ethics expert regarding Expedia class action lawsuit
Dear Professor Cohen,
I am writing this email to you because you are a professor of business ethics at Seattle University and because of a certain class action lawsuit that is pending in King County against one of Washington's leading corporations Expedia, and that is described at Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
I believe that class action litigation such as that pending against Expedia undermines business ethics. My argumentation in support of this contention is set forth at length in this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?
I am trying to find a business ethics expert in the Seattle area who would be interested in joining with me in making a submission to the King County court judge that would argue how the class action lawsuit against Expedia the judge is overseeing undermines business ethics and is counterproductive to promoting ethical corporate behavior.
Would you be interested?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShattTo: ludeschj@seattleu.eduSent: 8/28/2009 11:38:18 A.M. Central Daylight TimeSubj: Seeking business ethics expert regarding Expedia class action lawsuit
Dear Professor Ludescher,
I am writing this email to you because you are a professor of business ethics at Seattle University and because of a certain class action lawsuit that is pending in King County against one of Washington's leading corporations Expedia, and that is described at Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
I believe that class action litigation such as that pending against Expedia undermines business ethics. My argumentation in support of this contention is set forth at length in this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?
I am trying to find a business ethics expert in the Seattle area who would be interested in joining with me in making a submission to the King County court judge that would argue how the class action lawsuit against Expedia the judge is overseeing undermines business ethics and is counterproductive to promoting ethical corporate behavior.
Would you be interested?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: stevecal@u.washington.edu
Sent: 9/1/2009 6:06:43 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Professor Calandrillo,
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
I am writing this email to you because of your "Law & Economics" area of expertise at the University of Washington School of Law. There is much of economics in manifold ways in class action lawsuits, including related to "doing justice" and "social utility." Would you have any comment you would care to make about my above two contentions? Would you be interested in joining me in expressing to the court in the Expdedia lawsuit any views on the subject?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: stevecal@u.washington.edu
To: RDShatt@aol.com
Sent: 9/2/2009 10:43:10 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: RE: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Hi Robert,
You raise very interesting points that I take well. I confess I am extremely overcommitted at the moment and unable to get involved in your cause. But I’m interested in the outcome of your objections so please do let me know what results.
Best,
Steve
Steve Calandrillo
From: RDShatt
To: stevecal@u.washington.edu
Sent: 9/3/2009 6:00:49 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Re: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Thank you very much for replying, Professor Calandrillo, and I will be desirous of letting you know about developments.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: mcginnis@u.washington.edu
Sent: 9/1/2009 7:21:37 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Professor McGinnis,
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
I am writing this email to you because of your "Civil Procedure" area of expertise at the University of Washington School of Law and your corporate litigation experience. My above contentions raise significant questions about when corporations should be looked through to identify "real parties in interest" and correlations between losses and unjust enrichments.
Would you have any comments you would care to make about my above two contentions? Would you be interested in joining me in expressing to the court in the Expdedia lawsuit any views on the subject?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: wolcher@u.washington.edu
Sent: 9/1/2009 7:31:34 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Professor Wolcher,
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
I am writing this email to you because of your "Remedies & Restitution" area of expertise at the University of Washington School of Law. My above contentions raise questions about when corporations should be looked through to identify "real parties in interest" and correlations between losses and unjust enrichments, and would seem to come under "Remedies & Restitution" to some extent.
Would you have any comment you would care to make about my above two contentions? Would you be interested in joining me in expressing to the court in the Expdedia lawsuit any views on the subject?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: rgordon@gee-law.com
Sent: 9/1/2009 8:24:44 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Professor Gordon,
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
I am writing this email to you because I have identified you as the Seattle University law school faculty member who has probably the most experience and expertise to comment on the subject of class action litigation and my above two contentions.
I recognize that it is highly unlikely that you and I will have any significant degree of agreement about the subject. I am soliciting law professors and business ethics professors at the University of Washington and Seattle University to join with me in expressing their views to Judge Benton about the Expedia class action. If some of them have differing views, I desire for differing views to be submitted to Judge Benton as well. I invite you to submit differing views to Judge Benton if you wish to take the time.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: annclark@seattleu.edu
Sent: 9/3/2009 4:54:14 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Fwd: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Dean Clark,
I sent the below email to Professor Gordon [set forth above] because he seemed to be the Seattle University law school faculty member who had the most experience and expertise to comment on the subject of class action lawsuits and on contentions I am trying to advance that, among other things, class action lawsuits undermine business ethics.
I have noticed your interest in medical liability and bioethics and thought you might have views on some of the matters I raise, particularly since Howard Dean seems to have informed the body politic that the plaintiffs' lawyers are putting their interest ahead of the country's interest in trying to address the national health care crisis.
I hope I hear back from you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
To: heyscott@u.washington.edu
Sent: 8/28/2009 11:02:13 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Seeking business ethics expert regarding Expedia class action lawsuit
Dear Professor Reynolds,
I am writing this email to you because you are a professor of business ethics at the University of Washington and because of a certain class action lawsuit that is pending in King County against one of Washington's leading corporations Expedia, and that is described at Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
I believe that class action litigation such as that pending against Expedia undermines business ethics. My argumentation in support of this contention is set forth at length in this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?
I am trying to find a business ethics expert in the Seattle area who would be interested in joining with me in making a submission to the King County court judge that would argue how the class action lawsuit against Expedia the judge is overseeing undermines business ethics and is counterproductive to promoting ethical corporate behavior.
Would you be interested?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: dienharj@seattleu.edu
Sent: 8/28/2009 11:16:32 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Seeking business ethics expert regarding Expedia class action lawsuit
Dear Professor Dienhart,
I am writing this email to you because you are a professor of business ethics at Seattle University and because of a certain class action lawsuit that is pending in King County against one of Washington's leading corporations Expedia, and that is described at Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
I believe that class action litigation such as that pending against Expedia undermines business ethics. My argumentation in support of this contention is set forth at length in this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?
I am trying to find a business ethics expert in the Seattle area who would be interested in joining with me in making a submission to the King County court judge that would argue how the class action lawsuit against Expedia the judge is overseeing undermines business ethics and is counterproductive to promoting ethical corporate behavior.
Would you be interested?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: cohenm@seattleu.edu
Sent: 8/28/2009 11:36:51 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Seeking business ethics expert regarding Expedia class action lawsuit
Dear Professor Cohen,
I am writing this email to you because you are a professor of business ethics at Seattle University and because of a certain class action lawsuit that is pending in King County against one of Washington's leading corporations Expedia, and that is described at Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
I believe that class action litigation such as that pending against Expedia undermines business ethics. My argumentation in support of this contention is set forth at length in this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?
I am trying to find a business ethics expert in the Seattle area who would be interested in joining with me in making a submission to the King County court judge that would argue how the class action lawsuit against Expedia the judge is overseeing undermines business ethics and is counterproductive to promoting ethical corporate behavior.
Would you be interested?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShattTo: ludeschj@seattleu.eduSent: 8/28/2009 11:38:18 A.M. Central Daylight TimeSubj: Seeking business ethics expert regarding Expedia class action lawsuit
Dear Professor Ludescher,
I am writing this email to you because you are a professor of business ethics at Seattle University and because of a certain class action lawsuit that is pending in King County against one of Washington's leading corporations Expedia, and that is described at Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
I believe that class action litigation such as that pending against Expedia undermines business ethics. My argumentation in support of this contention is set forth at length in this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics?
I am trying to find a business ethics expert in the Seattle area who would be interested in joining with me in making a submission to the King County court judge that would argue how the class action lawsuit against Expedia the judge is overseeing undermines business ethics and is counterproductive to promoting ethical corporate behavior.
Would you be interested?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: stevecal@u.washington.edu
Sent: 9/1/2009 6:06:43 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Professor Calandrillo,
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
I am writing this email to you because of your "Law & Economics" area of expertise at the University of Washington School of Law. There is much of economics in manifold ways in class action lawsuits, including related to "doing justice" and "social utility." Would you have any comment you would care to make about my above two contentions? Would you be interested in joining me in expressing to the court in the Expdedia lawsuit any views on the subject?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: stevecal@u.washington.edu
To: RDShatt@aol.com
Sent: 9/2/2009 10:43:10 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: RE: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Hi Robert,
You raise very interesting points that I take well. I confess I am extremely overcommitted at the moment and unable to get involved in your cause. But I’m interested in the outcome of your objections so please do let me know what results.
Best,
Steve
Steve Calandrillo
From: RDShatt
To: stevecal@u.washington.edu
Sent: 9/3/2009 6:00:49 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Re: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Thank you very much for replying, Professor Calandrillo, and I will be desirous of letting you know about developments.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: mcginnis@u.washington.edu
Sent: 9/1/2009 7:21:37 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Professor McGinnis,
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
I am writing this email to you because of your "Civil Procedure" area of expertise at the University of Washington School of Law and your corporate litigation experience. My above contentions raise significant questions about when corporations should be looked through to identify "real parties in interest" and correlations between losses and unjust enrichments.
Would you have any comments you would care to make about my above two contentions? Would you be interested in joining me in expressing to the court in the Expdedia lawsuit any views on the subject?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: wolcher@u.washington.edu
Sent: 9/1/2009 7:31:34 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Professor Wolcher,
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
I am writing this email to you because of your "Remedies & Restitution" area of expertise at the University of Washington School of Law. My above contentions raise questions about when corporations should be looked through to identify "real parties in interest" and correlations between losses and unjust enrichments, and would seem to come under "Remedies & Restitution" to some extent.
Would you have any comment you would care to make about my above two contentions? Would you be interested in joining me in expressing to the court in the Expdedia lawsuit any views on the subject?
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: rgordon@gee-law.com
Sent: 9/1/2009 8:24:44 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Professor Gordon,
I am a citizens' class action objector. The most recent class action of which I have received notice is against Expedia, Inc. (headquartered in the state of Washington) that is pending in King County Superior Court and that is further described here: Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
There are many critics and much criticism of class action lawsuits, and thousands of plaintiff class members, including myself, file objections in class actions about proposed settlements and attorney fees.
I am currently trying to advance two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.First, I contend that class action litigation such as the Expedia lawsuit does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in this article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?Second, I contend that this litigation such as the Expedia case is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they are being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention, I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I have sent emails to the presiding judge in the Expedia lawsuit, which may be found here.
I am writing this email to you because I have identified you as the Seattle University law school faculty member who has probably the most experience and expertise to comment on the subject of class action litigation and my above two contentions.
I recognize that it is highly unlikely that you and I will have any significant degree of agreement about the subject. I am soliciting law professors and business ethics professors at the University of Washington and Seattle University to join with me in expressing their views to Judge Benton about the Expedia class action. If some of them have differing views, I desire for differing views to be submitted to Judge Benton as well. I invite you to submit differing views to Judge Benton if you wish to take the time.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
From: RDShatt
To: annclark@seattleu.edu
Sent: 9/3/2009 4:54:14 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Fwd: In re Expedia Hotel Taxes and Fees Litigation
Dear Dean Clark,
I sent the below email to Professor Gordon [set forth above] because he seemed to be the Seattle University law school faculty member who had the most experience and expertise to comment on the subject of class action lawsuits and on contentions I am trying to advance that, among other things, class action lawsuits undermine business ethics.
I have noticed your interest in medical liability and bioethics and thought you might have views on some of the matters I raise, particularly since Howard Dean seems to have informed the body politic that the plaintiffs' lawyers are putting their interest ahead of the country's interest in trying to address the national health care crisis.
I hope I hear back from you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
Monday, August 31, 2009
Second email to Judge Benton
From: RDShatt
To: laura.dorris@kingcounty.gov
CC: steve@hbsslaw.com, jkaren@jonesday.com
Sent: 8/31/2009 8:16:55 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Re: In re EXPEDIA HOTEL TAXES AND FEES LITIGATION (Judge Benton)
Dear Judge Benton,
I would like to expand on my email that I sent you over the weekend.
I have two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.
First is the one I indicated in the prior email, to wit, I contend that class action litigation such as this case does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in the previously cited article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?
Second, I contend that this litigation is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.
The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention,
I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I hope you will reflect on my two contentions. If you think they have merit and they persuade you that litigation such as this class action has less social utility and does less to serve the ends of justice than you previously thought, I hope you will signify that by reducing the amount of attorneys fees you would otherwise approve.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
To: laura.dorris@kingcounty.gov
CC: steve@hbsslaw.com, jkaren@jonesday.com
Sent: 8/31/2009 8:16:55 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Re: In re EXPEDIA HOTEL TAXES AND FEES LITIGATION (Judge Benton)
Dear Judge Benton,
I would like to expand on my email that I sent you over the weekend.
I have two contentions that I think are deserving of more attention than they have heretofore received. The two contentions have a connection to each other I believe.
First is the one I indicated in the prior email, to wit, I contend that class action litigation such as this case does not promote an objective of the law to lessen corporate wrongdoing, and such litigation is in fact counterproductive to that end and it undermines the fostering and inculcation of ethical business conduct. My argumentation to this effect is set out at length in the previously cited article of mine: Does the Law Undermine Business Ethics?
Second, I contend that this litigation is very questionable in serving the social utility of "doing justice." The main reason it is questionable is that I believe insufficient attention is paid to the extent to which this litigation at bottom is only about making transfers of amounts by and among parties in interest who are not culpable of any wrongdoing. It is possible there has been wrongdoing by corporate officers and employees or other individuals, and as a result some innocent parties have received a benefit from the wrongdoing and other innocent parties have had a loss or cost imposed on them. Whether or not there has been such wrongdoing, the case against the corporation should be considered as an unjust enrichment case, and nothing more. The facts and circumstances of all the persons who have been unjustly enriched and at whose expense they have been unjustly enriched are likely highly variable and somewhat indeterminate, and it is likely there has not been adequate investigation, or opportunity for argument, as to persons who are contended to have been unjustly enriched, the particular facts about whether or not he was unjustly enriched or, if he was unjustly enriched, about whether more is being taken from him in the litigation than the amount by which he was unjustly enriched.
The reason I believe insufficient attention is paid to viewing the case as being nothing more than an unjust enrichment case is a certain blindness that has arisen in the law because the plaintiffs' lawyers get their riches by and large out of the pockets of parties in interest who are innocent of wrongdoing. In order to do that, they want to bang the drum of corporate wrongdoing and do not want any reasonable and thoughtful consideration of factors such as who the wrongdoing individuals are, how much those individuals benefited from their wrongdoing, how much they being called on or not called on to compensate harmed parties, and to what extent is it fair and just in the situation to have innocent parties in interest pay for an alleged loss.Having stated the foregoing reason of the explanation for my second contention,
I think you will readily discern its connection to my first contention.
I hope you will reflect on my two contentions. If you think they have merit and they persuade you that litigation such as this class action has less social utility and does less to serve the ends of justice than you previously thought, I hope you will signify that by reducing the amount of attorneys fees you would otherwise approve.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Email to Expedia directors
From: RDShattTo: ir@expedia.comSent: 8/30/2009 11:10:19 A.M. Central Daylight TimeSubj: To Expedia directors: Re King County, WA taxes/service fees litigation
Dear Expedia directors,
I am dismayed that the Expedia Board decided to capitulate in the King County, Washington, class action lawsuit. See Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
I have sent this email to Judge Benton and hope to take further action to register my strong citizen's disapproval about this litigation. Whether there is any support the Board, or individual directors, can give to me on the matter, I don't know, but any such support will be most appreciated.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
Dear Expedia directors,
I am dismayed that the Expedia Board decided to capitulate in the King County, Washington, class action lawsuit. See Expedia Litigation Settlement Website.
I have sent this email to Judge Benton and hope to take further action to register my strong citizen's disapproval about this litigation. Whether there is any support the Board, or individual directors, can give to me on the matter, I don't know, but any such support will be most appreciated.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
Email to Judge Benton
From: RDShatt
To: laura.dorris@kingcounty.gov
CC: steve@hbsslaw.com, jkaren@jonesday.com
Sent: 8/29/2009 11:52:09 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re EXPEDIA HOTEL TAXES AND FEES LITIGATION (Judge Benton)
Dear Judge Benton,
I don't know if the bailiff will pass this email along to you. I hope the bailiff does, but that is the bailiff's call to make and not mine.
I have received notice as a purported member of the plaintiff class, but I am writing this email more as a citizen who has strong beliefs that class action lawsuits such as this Expedia litigation, on balance, ill serve important societal interests, they do not contribute positively to advancing relevant societal interests in a way that justifies them, and such litigation should be prevented from occurring.
Whether I, as a member of the plaintiff class, will actually file an objection with the court is something I will decide later. In the meantime I am copying this email to counsel for the plaintiffs and counsel for the defendant (the plaintiffs' law firm does not appear to provide email addresses for its individual attorneys and I am using this general contact email address steve@hbsslaw.com for the plaintiff firm that appears on its website and hopefully the email will be passed on to Mr. Volk).
One of the reasons I believe this sort of class action litigation ill serves important societal interests is that I believe the litigation undermines corporate business ethics. My argumentation in support of this contention is set forth at length in this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics? I hope you will take a look at that article and see what you think.
For your information, I expect to be taking other steps to express my citizen's disapproval of this litigation, and I will be indicating my actions in this Section J8 of my blog How To Combat Plaintiffs' Lawyers.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
To: laura.dorris@kingcounty.gov
CC: steve@hbsslaw.com, jkaren@jonesday.com
Sent: 8/29/2009 11:52:09 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: In re EXPEDIA HOTEL TAXES AND FEES LITIGATION (Judge Benton)
Dear Judge Benton,
I don't know if the bailiff will pass this email along to you. I hope the bailiff does, but that is the bailiff's call to make and not mine.
I have received notice as a purported member of the plaintiff class, but I am writing this email more as a citizen who has strong beliefs that class action lawsuits such as this Expedia litigation, on balance, ill serve important societal interests, they do not contribute positively to advancing relevant societal interests in a way that justifies them, and such litigation should be prevented from occurring.
Whether I, as a member of the plaintiff class, will actually file an objection with the court is something I will decide later. In the meantime I am copying this email to counsel for the plaintiffs and counsel for the defendant (the plaintiffs' law firm does not appear to provide email addresses for its individual attorneys and I am using this general contact email address steve@hbsslaw.com for the plaintiff firm that appears on its website and hopefully the email will be passed on to Mr. Volk).
One of the reasons I believe this sort of class action litigation ill serves important societal interests is that I believe the litigation undermines corporate business ethics. My argumentation in support of this contention is set forth at length in this online article of mine: Does the Civil Liability System Undermine Business Ethics? I hope you will take a look at that article and see what you think.
For your information, I expect to be taking other steps to express my citizen's disapproval of this litigation, and I will be indicating my actions in this Section J8 of my blog How To Combat Plaintiffs' Lawyers.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Shattuck
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)