American Legal System

Why Class Action Litigation Matters: Paul Bland Calls Out Consumer Injustice

Christopher Nace, Esq. Paul Bland, a seasoned trial attorney and freshly anointed Executive Director of Public Justice is an enemy to the dark side. Simply put, his life work is against the injustices of “The Man”: forced arbitration, gender and race discrimination, corporate negligence, fraud…the list goes on. Nowadays, a keystone–or dare we say embodiment–of “The Man” is the Roberts Court. Since 2005, the conservative-leaning court is shaping up to be one of the most corporate friendly Supreme Courts in history…something of great concern given that big business today is seriously big (an average of multi-billion in the top ranks).  The track record of the Court is …

More

New York Lawyer Sums Up Why the McDonald’s Coffee Case is Still Important

The following blog was written by Eric Turkewitz, Esq. and shared on the New York Personal Injury Law Blog. In our opinion, Turkewitz nails why the “Hot Coffee Case” still persists in the public conscience 20 years later, and why trial attorneys should be concerned.   “McDonald’s Coffee Case, 20 years Later — And Why It Is Still Important Stella Liebeck v. McDonald’s, a/k/a The McDonald’s Hot Coffee Case, continues to be in the news despite the fact it was tried 20 years ago in New Mexico. 20. Years. Ago. It was in the news two years ago with the documentary …

More

What You Should Know Today: What Arrest Means for Your Fourth Amendment Rights & Your iPhone

This week, the Supreme Court will discuss whether law enforcement officials may search a person’s mobile phone without warrant. The decision will directly deal with the Fourth Amendment, which states that police officers must obtain a warrant based on probable cause to search “persons, houses, papers, and effects.” A narrow exception to the Fourth Amendment is that a police officer may immediately search a person’s body and immediate surroundings to ensure the officer’s safety and the preservation of evidence. This rule, however, should not deal with smart phones because 1) they are not necessarily weapons and 2) special devices can protect data …

More

General Mills Backs Down from Forced Arb Terms After Backlash

Brian Nettles, Esq. Last week, General Mills quietly published news about changes in its privacy policy and legal terms. In small print across the top of their homepage, Gen Mills posted, “Please note we also have new legal terms which require all disputes related to the purchase or use of any General Mills product or service to be resolved through binding arbitration.” What does this mean? Basically, that any dispute over anything that can be construed as a benefit received from Gen Mills must be handled through informal negotiation via email or forced arbitration. What this really means, is that …

More

Privacy Rights vs. “Liking to Share”: The Low Down on Social Media in Court

Pamela Mullis, Esq. The concern of privacy rights and desire to overshare on social media seem to be two opposites that attract–and clash–in today’s world, especially in the court of law. What can and cannot be used against people in court is under big debate. In the case McMillen v. Hummingbird Speedway, Inc., 2010 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 270 (Pa. County Ct. 2010), a judge concluded that, “no person choosing MySpace or Facebook as a communications forum could reasonably expect that his communications would remain confidential, as both sites clearly express the possibility of disclosure.” A month ago, …

More

Page 10 of 13« First...89101112...Last »