Tuesday, August 16, 2011

No help for Help maid

JJ reports that the author of The Help has won a defense verdict before Judge Green in Hinds Circuit Court, obtaining dismissal of the lawsuit by the alleged model for the family maid* in said novel. The intentional torts had a 1-year SOL and the plaintiff waited 2 years after publication to file suit.

... Kingfish posts Cooper's response opposing summary judgment on the SOL issue, in which she argues, literally, that she had a defense to SJ based on her judging the book by its cover. (See p. 5.) As Candace says on Phineas & Ferb, "that's why books have covers -- so you can judge them!" That theory does not seem to have availed in the present case.

(I do however confess to some curiosity how Cooper's claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress got dismissed, as it had a 3-year SOL; will have to watch the video of the hearing when time permits.)

... In other news, John McWhorter critiques the critics who complain that the movie is racist, insufficiently progressive, whatever.

* N.b. -- I haven't read the book or seen the movie, so I have no idea what I'm talking about.


  1. I seem to remember a case that held something to the effect of a plaintiff cant allege negligence to get around the SOL where the conduct was intentional.

    So if someone smacked me in the face on purpose, I cant wait 2 1/2 years and then prevail in a suit saying I was negligently struck.

  2. True dat, but the facts in the Help case strike me as better suited to the negligence claim: Stockett wasn't thinking of the harm she might cause, etc. More plausible in fact than "boy am I going to mock that Ms. Cooper, bwah-ha-ha ...."

    Now, it's hard to prove, so I can see SJ on it; but on an SOL basis?