Help Buju Banton Pay His Lawyer (What's His Name Again?)

I always say lawyers should get paid for good work.

That's why like-minded citizens can band together and help Buju defend himself (wire instructions included!):

Markus told the Observer that the cost of the first trial has taken a huge financial toll on the artiste and asked fans, friends and supporters of the artiste to assist in any way they can.

Very true.  That's one advantage the government always has when they decide to retry a case -- they never run out of money.

On the other hand, does anyone else find it unseemly (obscene?) that Ken Feinberg has already collected $2.5 million for three months' work on the Deepwater Horizon disaster:

The $850,000 monthly payments to Feinberg’s firm will continue through year-end and then will be reviewed, a person familiar with the contract said today.

The money goes to seven professionals at Feinberg’s firm and is paid by BP separately from the fund to help victims, according to the person, who spoke on condition of anonymity about details not spelled out in today’s report. Among those being paid is Feinberg’s brother David, according to the report. David Feinberg is listed on the firm’s website as director of special projects.

The payments from BP help offset the “significant distortion” the project is causing to the Feinberg firm’s business, Mukasey said in the report today. Feinberg Rozen has turned away three mediation requests since June, according to the report. 

 Ok, three mediation requests but come on!

The last time I used Feinberg for a mediation he was billing well north of $1000 an hour, and that was quite a while ago.

How's that compare to the hourly rate of an Article III judge, like Judge Barbier who is presiding over the actual MDL litigation?

BTW, the Judge picked the steering committee to oversee the prosecution of the Deepwater Horizon litigation, and our own Ervin Gonzalez made the list, which you can see here.

Does BP Dream of Electric Gene Stearns?

Charlie Crist thinks so:

The council recruited veteran Miami attorney Gene Stearns as an unpaid adviser. Stearns is a former aide to Democratic Gov. Reubin Askew and a champion of minority voting rights. It also recruited Dan Gerber, a Republican and a “toxic tort” expert who is a member of the conservative Federalist Society. Both are routine inhabitants of Florida Trend Magazine’s “Legal Elite.”

Ok, I have no problem adding Gene Stearns to any "legal dream team," and I happen to know and like Dan Gerber but first of all -- Dan's from Orlando.

Also, I wonder if there's any issue conflict at a minimum with some of Dan's writings or positions taken in the past with respect to the damage issues that will have to be sorted out before Special Master Feinberg?

Oh well, I'm sure they'll sort all that out.

Besides, what do I know?

Just like nearly everyone on these here intertubes, my strongly-held opinions are factually inaccurate and not especially subject to change, even when presented with direct proof that my "facts" are wrong.

(It's a self-esteem issue.)

Bill McCollum Actually Gets Something Right.

I've mediated before Kenneth Feinberg, and he's a big-shot, very expensive guy who happens to be exceptionally good at what he does.

That's why I was a bit puzzled by this Herald story on how he intends to interpret claims by Floridians under the new $20 billion compensation fund:

Feinberg said he'll come up with ``an expansive'' definition in the coming weeks. But when he appeared before the U.S. House Committee on Small Business last week, Feinberg said he would use ``Florida law'' as one measure of eligibility.

When asked about whether Florida businesses could make a claim based on the ``the public misperception of tar balls on beaches,'' Feinberg testified that it was a ``tough'' issue.

``Clearly, under Florida law, I think it's fair to say that it's not compensable. If there's no physical damage to the beaches and it's a public perception, I venture to say that it is not compensable,'' Feinberg said, noting ``that's in this area where some discretion's going to have to be exercised.''

Those are fighting words for McCollum.

McCollum said Tuesday that Feinberg was wrong on two counts. First, McCollum said, Feinberg shouldn't use Florida state law to decide how he'll pay claims under the federal Oil Pollution Act. Second, McCollum said, Feinberg misunderstood the strictness of state law.

For instance, McCollum said, a Key West hotel that is losing business because of the misperception of oily water and beaches could still get damages.

``I believe what Mr. Feinberg was saying was under Florida's law, you couldn't get any damages or recovery from that. In fact, we believe he's quite wrong about that.''

It's unclear the context of Feinberg's remarks on Florida law, but I doubt he is suggesting that claims under the federal oil pollution act should be construed pursuant to Florida common law.

So that whole issue is a red herring.

On state tort and statutory claims brought solely under Florida law, however, I think McCollum has a point with respect to "misperception" claims. Also, by the time these claims are heard there will in fact be some oil dispersion along Florida's beaches (there already is).

You can read the entirety of McCollum's halfway-decent letter to Feinberg here.