Verizon sued

A class action suit for up to $50 billion has been filed against Verizon on behalf of it's subscribers.

The New Jersey lawyers who filed the federal suit against Verizon in Manhattan yesterday, Bruce Afran and Carl Mayer, said they would consider filing suits against BellSouth and AT&T in other jurisdictions.

"This is almost certainly the largest single intrusion into American civil liberties ever committed by any U.S. administration," Mr. Afran said. "Americans expect their phone records to be private. That's our bedrock governing principle of our phone system." In addition to damages, the suit seeks an injunction against the security agency to stop the collection of phone numbers.

Several legal experts cited ambiguities in the laws that may be used by the government and the phone companies to defend the National Security Agency program.

I'm sorry, but that's not the way the government is going to head off this case. It doesn't want a legal decision here at all. It will invoke the State Secrets Act as the vehicle to stop the trial. And, it will probably succeed, just as it will probably succeed with the same ploy in the suit against the same companies over the NSA spying that was revealed in December.

Meanwhile, I just have to make a comment about one of the guys bringing this suit, Bruce Afran. I would love to see this case go to trial, but I have a rather strong distaste for he who is trying it.

I testified against Bruce in a case some years ago, and, I'm glad to say, I took him to the cleaners. I was expert for the defendent, he was counsel for the plaintiff. The trial had been bi-furcated, with the trial on liability preceding the trial on damages before the same jury. The jury had already handed down a verdict on liability against my client after only about five minutes deliberation, and the only remaining question was damages. I testified there had been no damages. The plaintiff had failed, and I testified he would have failed regardless of the actions of the defendent, just as all other companies in similar circumstances had failed. Afran jumped up and down objecting to my testimony and impugning my honesty, but apparently enough of the jury bought it to end up hung, resulting in a mis-trial.

Subsequent negotiations led to a settlement, but I'm certain it was nowhere near the damages claimed by Afran on behalf of his client.

He tends to be an "ambulence chaser" in big cases of questionable merit. And, in my judgment, his courtroom antics are questionable as well. Still, he seems to have profited from his practice, and I wish him success in this case even if I do so with hesitation.