'Nevermind' baby sues Nirvana again

The man depicted as a naked baby on Nirvana's 1991 album "Nevermind" has revived his lawsuit accusing the band of sexually exploiting him, after a US judge dismissed an earlier version of the case.

Spencer Elden, the plaintiff, maintained in an amended complaint filed on Wednesday in Los Angeles that the "lascivious nature of his image" amounted to "child pornography" that helped the band reap tens of millions of dollars at his expense.

Nirvana drummer Dave Grohl and bassist Krist Novoselic; Courtney Love, the widow of Nirvana lead singer Kurt Cobain; several record labels, and photographer Kirk Weddle are among the 10 defendants. Elden is seeking at least $150,000 from each.

Lawyers for the defendants did not immediately respond on Thursday to requests for comment.

The "Nevermind" cover art depicted Elden, then four months old, swimming naked toward a dollar bill pierced with a fish hook, an image Elden has said caused him "lifelong damages."

Elden filed his amended complaint nine days after US District Judge Fernando Olguin dismissed an earlier version because Elden had not responded to the defendants' dismissal motion.

The latest complaint includes a declaration from art director Robert Fisher, describing a stock photo he used for a mockup for the "Nevermind" cover that depicted a different baby and did not show his penis.

Elden said the band decided to create its own photo to save money, with Cobain sardonically suggesting that the cover include a warning sticker saying: "If you're offended by this, you must be a closet pedophile."

Fisher was dismissed as a defendant last month.

Elden's lawsuit no longer accuses Nirvana of violating a 2003 federal law against child sex trafficking, after the defendants said that law could not be applied retroactively.

"Nevermind" features Nirvana's signature song "Smells Like Teen Spirit," and its worldwide sales exceed 30 million. Grohl now leads the band Foo Fighters. Cobain died in 1994.

Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Bill Berkrot

-reuters

Boxer Adrien Broner hit with $830K judgment in sex assault claim

CLEVELAND — An Ohio judge awarded $830,000 to a woman who claimed former boxing champion Adrien “The Problem” Broner sexually assaulted her at a Cleveland nightclub.

The default judgement was delivered Tuesday after Broner failed to defend himself in the lawsuit.


The Cincinnati native was accused in the lawsuit and a criminal case of pinning a woman he didn’t know on a couch in June 2018 and kissing her against her will as she struggled to free herself. The lawsuit said one of Broner’s friends pulled him off the woman after someone took a photo of the assault.

Broner, 30, was originally charged with sexual imposition in Cuyahoga County. He pleaded guilty in April to misdemeanor charges of assault and unlawful restraint and was sentenced to probation.

Attorneys for Broner in the lawsuit received permission from Judge Nancy Margaret Russo in November to withdraw from the case, leaving Broner to defend himself. He appeared at a default hearing without representation on Dec. 3 but never appeared for a deposition or responded to discovery requests, said the woman’s attorney, Ashlie Case Sletvold.

Attempts to reach Broner were unsuccessful. A man who identified himself as Broner’s manager hung up when asked about the case on Wednesday.

The award includes both prejudgment and post-judgment interest.

Sletvold said her client, who she said received a year of intensive therapy for post-traumatic stress syndrome, hopes Broner has learned “he can’t put his hands on strangers.”

“It doesn’t matter who he thinks he is,” Sletvold said. “It’s not an appropriate way to behave.”

Asked whether she believes Broner will pay her client, Sletvold said she would hoped someone had taken care of his money. She referred to videos posted online of Broner flushing cash down toilets.

The Cincinnati Enquirer in 2017 detailed Broner’s previous brushes with the law.


An undefeated Broner won the world welterweight title in June 2013 against Paul Malignaggi but lost it the following December in a bout against Marcos Maidana. He lost a title fight by unanimous decision against welterweight Manny Pacquiao in January.

Broner has a career professional record of 33-4-1 with 24 knockouts.

source: sports.inquirer.net

James Franco’s Ex-Students Sue Him After Allegedly Being Forced into Orgy Scene

Two actresses sued James Franco and the acting and film school he founded Thursday, saying he intimidated his students into gratuitous and exploitative sexual situations far beyond those acceptable on Hollywood film sets.

Sarah Tither-Kaplan and Toni Gaal, former students at the actor’s now-closed Studio 4, said in the lawsuit filed in Los Angeles Superior Court that Franco pushed his students into performing in increasingly explicit sex scenes on camera in an orgy typesetting.

Franco sought to create a pipeline of young women who were subjected to his personal and professional sexual exploitation in the name of education, the suit alleges.

The women say students were led to believe roles in Franco’s films would be available to those who went along.

The situations described in the suit arose during a master class in sex scenes that Franco taught at the school, which he opened in 2014 and closed in 2017.

The lawsuit, which also names Franco’s production company Rabbit Bandini and his partners as defendants, includes allegations Tither-Kaplan made publicly last year after Franco won a Golden Globe Award for The Disaster Artist.


Gaal is speaking out for the first time.

In an interview on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert last year, Franco called the sexual misconduct stories about him inaccurate, but said, If I’ve done something wrong, I will fix it.
I have to.

The 41-year-old actor’s attorney Michael Plonsker said the claims in the lawsuit are ill-informed and have already been debunked.

James will not only fully defend himself, but will also seek damages from the plaintiffs and their attorneys for filing this scurrilous publicity-seeking lawsuit, Plonsker said in a statement.

The lawsuit alleges that to take Franco’s master class, students had to audition by simulating sex acts on film, which he watched to choose candidates.


It says the class began with encouraging female student actors to appear topless, then perform in sex scenes, then orgies and gratuitous full nudity, without the careful guidelines and closed sets that are the industry standard for shooting sex scenes.

The suit alleges that Gaal was kept out of the master class for questioning its exploitative nature.

Tither-Kaplan took the class and was subsequently cast in Rabbit Bandini films, which she now recognizes was a direct result of her willingness to accept Franco’s exploitative behavior without complaint.


The lawsuit seeks damages to be determined at trial, an apology from Franco and his partners, and the handover or destruction of video of the plaintiffs.

Attorneys for the women are looking for more plaintiffs to join, and for it to become a class action.

Tither-Kaplan previously recounted her experiences with Franco and the school as one of five women who talked to the Los Angeles Times about him early in 2018.

She was also among the women who spoke out against Franco on Twitter when he won his Golden Globe in January 2018 at a time when the #MeToo movement was surging.

Tither-Kaplan later told the LA Times that the Times Up anti-sexual harassment lapel pin Franco wore to the ceremony felt like a slap in my face.

The organization behind the pin, Times Up Now, said in a statement Thursday that If these allegations are true, we hope the survivors, and all impacted by this behavior, receive some measure of justice.

Since the allegations first emerged, James Franco has made few public appearances, but work has not seemed to slow down for him on the big or small screen.


The HBO series The Deuce, which he executive produces and stars in, began its third and final season on Sept. 9.

James Franco also appeared last year in the Coen brothers acclaimed Western anthology The Ballad of Buster Scruggs, which was nominated for three Oscars.

And this weekend he will have two films that he directed and stars in playing in theaters: Zeroville, an adaptation of Steve Erickson’s 2007 novel that was filmed in 2014 but faced delays in distribution, as well as Pretenders, with Brian Cox and Dennis Quaid.

Zeroville, which co-stars Seth Rogen, Megan Fox, and Will Ferrell, is already a box office bomb and critical dud.

This past weekend it played on 80 screens and made an average of $111 per screen.

And Pretenders, which opens in limited release Friday, is not faring much better with critics.

source: usa.inquirer.net

21 states sue Trump administration over new coal rules

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – A coalition of 21 Democratic-led states sued the Trump administration Tuesday over its decision to ease restrictions on coal-fired power plants, with California’s governor saying the president is trying to rescue an outdated industry.

In June, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency eliminated the agency’s Clean Power Plan and replaced it with a new rule that gives states more leeway in deciding upgrades for coal-fired power plants.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, says the new rule violates the federal Clean Air Act because it does not meaningfully replace power plants’ greenhouse gas emissions.

“They’re rolling things back to an age that no longer exists, trying to prop up the coal industry,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom said at a news conference. He said the lawsuit was not just about Trump but “our kids and grandkids” who would continue to be harmed by coal pollutants.

West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, whose state produced the second most coal behind Wyoming in 2017, predicted the lawsuit will ultimately fail at the U.S. Supreme Court, which stayed an earlier Obama administration attempt in 2016 at the request of a competing 27-state coalition.

He called the lawsuit a “big government ‘power grab'” and argued that the Democratic attorneys general “are dead wrong” in their interpretation of the Clean Air Act.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The U.S. EPA said in a statement that it wouldn’t comment on pending litigation, but that it “worked diligently to ensure we produced a solid rule that we believe will be upheld in the courts, unlike the previous administration’s Clean Power Plan.”


The lawsuit was filed by attorneys general in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin and the District of Columbia.

“The science is indisputable; our climate is changing. Ice caps are melting. Sea levels are rising. Weather is becoming more and more extreme,” New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is leading the coalition, said in a statement.

“Rather than staying the course with policies aimed at fixing the problem and protecting people’s health, safety, and the environment, the Trump Administration repealed the Clean Power Plan and replaced it with this ‘Dirty Power’ rule.”

The states were joined by six local governments: Boulder, Colorado; Chicago, Los Angeles, New York City, Philadelphia and South Miami, Florida.


The EPA’s analysis of the new rules predicts an extra 300 to 1,500 people will die each year by 2030 because of additional air pollution from the power grid. But EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler in June said Americans want “reliable energy that they can afford,” adding he expected more coal plans to open as a result.

“It’s more of a fossil fuel protection plan,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said.

It would replace the Clean Power Plan, which would require cutting emissions fossil fuel-burning power plants. Becerra said that was expected to eliminate as much climate change pollution as is emitted by more than 160 million cars a year, the equivalent of 70 percent of the nation’s passenger cars, and was projected to prevent up to 3,600 additional deaths annually.

Newsom and James said states’ existing efforts to reduce greenhouse gases are beginning to work while creating green jobs and vibrant economies.

In the Northeast, 10 states including New York formed the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative that has reduced power plant emissions by more than 50 percent.

California’s power grid used more energy from non-greenhouse gas sources like wind and solar power in 2017 than from electricity generated by fossil fuels for the first time since the California Air Resources Board began keeping track. The board also found that pollution from transportation did not rise as fast as in previous years, and reported that 2017 was the second straight year emissions fell below the state’s 2020 target. /gsg

source: newsinfo.inquirer.net

Lawsuits accuse Tesla's Musk of fraud over tweets, going-private proposal

Tesla Inc and Chief Executive Elon Musk were sued twice on Friday by investors who said they fraudulently engineered a scheme to squeeze short-sellers, including through Musk's proposal to take the electric car company private.

The lawsuits were filed three days after Musk stunned investors by announcing on Twitter that he might take Tesla private in a record $72 billion transaction that valued the company at $420 per share, and that "funding" had been "secured."

In one of the lawsuits, the plaintiff Kalman Isaacs said Musk's tweets were false and misleading, and together with Tesla's failure to correct them amounted to a "nuclear attack" designed to "completely decimate" short-sellers.

The lawsuits filed by Isaacs and William Chamberlain said Musk's and Tesla's conduct artificially inflated Tesla's stock price and violated federal securities laws.

Tesla did not respond to a request for comment on the proposed class-action complaints filed in the federal court in San Francisco. The company is based in nearby Palo Alto, California.

Short-sellers borrow shares they believe are overpriced, sell them, and then repurchase shares later at what they hope will be a lower price to make a profit.

Such investors have long been an irritant for Musk, who has sometimes used Twitter to criticize them.

Musk's Aug. 7 tweets helped push Tesla's stock price more than 13 percent above the prior day's close.

The stock has since given back more than two-thirds of that gain, in part following reports that the US Securities and Exchange Commission had begun inquiring about Musk's activity.

Musk has not offered evidence that he has lined up the necessary funding to take Tesla private, and the complaints did not offer proof to the contrary.

But Isaacs said Tesla's and Musk's conduct caused the volatility that cost short-sellers hundreds of millions of dollars from having to cover their short positions, and caused all Tesla securities purchasers to pay inflated prices.

Tesla's market value exceeds $60 billion, and its shares closed Friday up $3.04 at $355.49.

According to his complaint, Isaacs bought 3,000 Tesla shares on Aug. 8 to cover his short position.

The proposed class period in Isaacs' lawsuit runs from the afternoon of Aug. 7 through the next day, and in Chamberlain's lawsuit runs from Aug. 7 to Aug. 10. — Reuters

Trump, US execs sued over ‘inhumane’ treatment of detained immigrants

A lawsuit filed Wednesday accuses US President Donald Trump and senior administration officials of subjecting more than 1,000 undocumented immigrants to “inhumane” conditions at a federal prison in California.

Since June 8 the group of detainees has been imprisoned “in violation of their constitutional rights”, according to the complaint.

“They are locked in prison cells for much of the day and all night. No health care provider has assessed them,” it says.


The suit was filed a day after lawmakers assailed the Trump administration for its controversial border policy, which in another widely condemned case, has led to the separation of more than 2,500 undocumented migrant children from their parents or guardians.

The complaint says the immigrants in California have been subjected to “harsh prison conditions that can only reasonably be described as punitive and inhumane”.



Trump, Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, officials from Immigration and Customs Enforcement and others are named as defendants.

The detainees are only allowed to exercise outdoors for a few hours a week, and are prevented from worshipping freely, the suit says.

“In the chow hall, they are offered inadequate and, at times, inedible food, such as spoiled milk and sandwiches that consist of just two slices of bread,” it adds.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement — which the suit says transferred the detainees to the prison in early June — declined to comment.

“Confining immigrants in these conditions is unconscionable and unconstitutional,” said Victoria Lopez, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, one of the organizations that filed the complaint on behalf of the detainees.

Margot Mendelson of the Prison Law Office, another organization involved in the suit, said that people should not be imprisoned for seeking asylum in the US.


“The federal government is needlessly locking these individuals into a medium-security federal prison, and is depriving them of basic human needs such as healthcare, food, and sunlight,” Mendelson said.   /vvp

source: newsinfo.inquirer.net

Johnny Depp settles lawsuits involving former managers

LOS ANGELES — Johnny Depp has settled lawsuits with his former business managers that put a spotlight on the actor’s lavish lifestyle.

Depp’s representatives said on Monday that the “Pirates of the Caribbean” star had settled litigation filed against The Management Group, which he accused in January 2017 seeking more than $25 million over alleged financial abuse and negligence. No details of the settlement were released.

Depp had accused the firm of filing his taxes late, costing him $7.5 million in penalties. The firm denied filing the returns late, and said Depp’s taxes were paid when the star had money available to pay them.


The firm also countersued and argued that Depp was solely to blame for his money troubles, spending more than $2 million. That lawsuit said Depp paid more than $75 million to buy and maintain 14 homes, including a French chateau and a chain of islands in the Bahamas, as well as a 150-foot yacht, private jet travel and expensive art collection.

The cases had sparked name-calling on both sides, with a spokesman for Depp’s former managers calling the actor a “habitual liar” in August 2017.

Lawyers for The Management Group declined comment Monday.

A statement released by a Depp spokesperson said that settling the case, which had been scheduled to begin trial next month, would allow him to focus on touring with his band, Hollywood Vampires, and promoting the latest film based on J.K. Rowling’s books, “Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald.”

The film is scheduled to be released later in November. MKH

source: entertainment.inquirer.net

Why File a California Mesothelioma Lawsuit?

Filing a California mesothelioma lawsuit just became an even more prudent step for you to take thanks to a new California State Supreme Court victory.  That State Supreme Court victory was won by Kazan Law partner Ted Pelletier, we are proud to say. Thanks to this important new court ruling, companies that exposed workers to asbestos can be held liable for other people living in a worker’s home who become sick as a result.

New California Mesothelioma Lawsuit Ruling Helps Families

California mesothelioma lawsuits can now be filed not only for a worker sickened by asbestos exposure but also by a family member who has become ill from secondary asbestos exposure. The family member may have been exposed to asbestos dust brought home on the clothing, hair or tools of someone who worked with asbestos-containing materials.

Kazan Law partner Ted Pelletier successfully argued that employers, all of whom were well aware of the health hazards of asbestos, had a duty to provide protective measures such as showers or locker facilities for changing clothes to prevent workers from binging asbestos home.

Although many years may elapse between the time of asbestos exposure and the onset of mesothelioma, asbestos exposure is the only known cause of mesothelioma. Asbestos dust typically is inhaled through the nose or sometimes the mouth. When it is inhaled it can settle in the lungs and damage the cells of the tissue lining the lungs. This is pleural mesothelioma.  The sharp asbestos fibers can also injure the cells lining the abdominal area and cause peritoneal mesothelioma.  There are other kinds but these are the most common.

Whatever kind of mesothelioma it is, the progress of the disease is slow, irreversible and almost always fatal. The new California State Supreme Court ruling is a great step forward in justice for mesothelioma families. And we at Kazan Law are proud of the part we played. But there are other reasons why it is important to file a California mesothelioma lawsuit.

California’s Favorable Laws Can Help a California Mesothelioma Lawsuit

A California mesothelioma lawsuit can benefit from the high level of expertise that California mesothelioma attorneys have in this highly specialized area of law. Kazan law founding partner Steven Kazan is one of lawyers who helped found modern asbestos litigation in the 1970s. Over decades, lawyers like Steven Kazan have had a major impact on California laws on asbestos cases. They have helped to create a legal climate that tends to be more supportive of asbestos victims with fair laws and substantial jury verdicts.  The California legislature and courts have justified the creation and application of special asbestos rules as a reasonable response to the tragic devastation faced by victims of asbestos exposure.

Because of the support for social justice and sympathy for victims of asbestos exposure, many out-of-state asbestos plaintiffs opt to file a California mesothelioma lawsuit.

In addition, California’s laws are more favorable to mesothelioma plaintiffs than the laws of some other states. Some of the other states with large number of asbestos lawsuits have passed legislation to restrict access to the judicial system for people who have been injured by exposure to asbestos, or limit the damages they can recover or make suing more difficult.

California Mesothelioma Lawsuits Are Fast-Tracked

There’s another advantage for filing a California mesothelioma lawsuit. California is usually at the forefront of states in enacting laws that protect the rights of individuals, especially with respect to health and safety.  This can bode well for the sensitive timing of a mesothelioma lawsuit.

For example, since 2000, some states with a large number of asbestos lawsuits began enacting laws to limit new filings. But not California. As a result, some of the state’s courts have reportedly seen an increase in the number of asbestos lawsuits filed by both in-state and out-of-state claimants in recent years.

In response, California chose not to enact the kinds of laws that now obstruct asbestos lawsuits in other states. Instead our courts have enacted measures to manage large asbestos caseloads by trying to expedite claims by mesothelioma patients. This creates a fast-track approach to scheduling that allows the cases of terminally ill patients to go to trial in 120 days.

Who Can File a California Mesothelioma Lawsuit?
Among the restrictions placed on asbestos litigation by some states are laws that limit or exclude out-of-state residents from filing mesothelioma lawsuits. There are no such restrictions in California. Anyone can file a California mesothelioma lawsuit.

And that is an advantage because a well handled California mesothelioma lawsuit is likely to be more successful and deliver larger verdicts. Even if your California mesothelioma lawsuit settles before going to trial, your settlement may be larger in California. Companies know that a trial in a California court is likely to go against them. This can help motivate them to agree to a more generous settlement.

Also some of the best asbestos law firms in the country like Kazan Law are based in California. Your mesothelioma lawsuit can give you financial stability to comfort you during your illness and provide for your family once you are gone. Where you file – and what law firm you choose to represent you – can make the difference of millions of dollars in the settlement or jury verdict you receive. That is a key reason to file a California mesothelioma lawsuit.

A California Mesothelioma Lawsuit Will Not Require A Lot of Travel

Your location and the expense of travel should not stop you from filing a California mesothelioma lawsuit. When you work with a top asbestos law firm, your lawyer will travel to your location to meet with you. Kazan Law lawyers regularly meet with clients outside California, sometimes traveling across the country to work with clients who have mesothelioma. We understand that you will be better able to help give us the information we need to win your California mesothelioma lawsuit in the comfort of your own home.

So if you or a loved one has mesothelioma, contact us for a free evaluation to see if a California mesothelioma lawsuit is right for you.

source: kazanlaw.com

Toddler swallows battery; family sues hospital

MIAMI, United States — A Florida family sued a hospital for malpractice on Wednesday, saying their baby suffered severe burns because it took too long to remove a coin-sized battery that she swallowed.

Parents Cole Parsons and Courtney Thorne said in a lawsuit that Wolfson Children’s Hospital in Jacksonville should have taken out the lithium battery within two hours, which is recommended by poison control centers. They also sued Dr. David Smith, who they say downplayed the dangers. The battery was removed about five hours after the parents arrived at the hospital, the complaint said.

Nineteen-month-old Ava-Kate Parsons has undergone 20 surgeries since she swallowed the battery March 10. Her mother was at home at the time and saw as her daughter swallowed the coin battery that popped out of a remote control. She rushed to get it out, but it had gone down her throat, and she called 911.

The National Capital Poison Center, a nonprofit call center, said more than 1,900 children swallowed button batteries last year and there were 20 fatal or major incidents in children younger than 6. Those batteries are found in remote controls, calculators and other small devices.

At the hospital, the parents wanted the battery taken out right away because they worried the girl would be exposed to dangerous chemicals. But the father said Smith told them the incident was “no different than a coin in her throat.”

“He seemed pretty relaxed about the whole situation,” Parsons said. “A little while later, we learned there is an electrical burn taking place in her esophagus, and she was rushed to emergency surgery.”

The hospital did not comment on the case, citing privacy laws.

Attorney Eric Ragatz said the amount the parents are suing for is yet to be determined. He said they have spent between $300,000 and $400,000 on medical bills, not counting what they spent traveling to Boston to take Ava-Kate for treatment every two weeks. The girl’s mother, a nursing assistant, also took a leave from work and only returned part time to care for her daughter.

Parsons said doctors have told him their daughter may need to continue treatment to stretch out the esophagus well up into her teens. While other toddlers her age experiment with foods of many textures, she can only eat pureed food, which Parsons says has slowed down her growth.

“They really don’t have a lot to say about what exactly her course is going to be,” Parsons said. “We are stressed out about the unknown.” CBB

source: newsinfo.inquirer.net

Lindsay Lohan loses lawsuit versus ‘Grand Theft Auto’ makers

NEW YORK — A New York state appeals court on Thursday dismissed a lawsuit by actress Lindsay Lohan that says the producers of “Grand Theft Auto” used a likeness of her in one of their video games.

A panel of judges in the Manhattan Appellate Division ruled that Take-Two Interactive Software Inc. didn’t use her actual “name, portrait or picture” and therefore didn’t violate her right to privacy.

In the lawsuit, Lohan accused the producers of modeling her physical features, including clothing, shoulder-length blonde hair and voice in “Grand Theft Auto V,” a video game that takes place in the fictional city “Los Santos” where players act as car-stealing criminals.

The court said the depictions deserved First Amendment protection.

“This video game’s unique story, characters, dialogue, and environment, combined with the player’s ability to choose how to proceed in the game, render it a work of fiction and satire,” the judges wrote.

Similar claims against Take-Two by “Mob Wives” television star Karen Gravano also were dismissed in the combined ruling.

A message left with Lohan’s lawyer wasn’t returned. Gravano’s lawyer said they’re exploring their options.

source: entertainment.inquirer.net

Advantages of a California Mesothelioma Lawsuit

Did you know that you can file a California mesothelioma lawsuit in any state in the country? You don’t have to file in the state where you live. You don’t have to file in the state where a corporation you are suing is headquartered (which would be impractical in any event, since many mesothelioma cases involve multiple corporations from different states). People can file a California mesothelioma lawsuit from any state in the US. If the facts are right, at Kazan Law we think that is just what you should do.

Advantages of a California Mesothelioma Lawsuit

California is one of several states with higher than average levels of asbestos exposure. In fact, there are more deaths due to mesothelioma and other asbestos-related illnesses each year in California than in any other state. In addition to heavy industries and shipping, where asbestos was commonly used, Californians face an added threat from asbestos mines.

Not surprisingly, California is also one of the states with the largest number of asbestos lawsuits. This is partly historical: when people with mesothelioma first began to file lawsuits in the 1970s, many of the plaintiffs were based in California because of the state’s high rate of asbestos disease.

That isn’t the only reason so many people file asbestos lawsuits in California. Mesothelioma lawsuits are in a special category in California courts. The judicial system in the state has different rules governing asbestos litigation, including a faster route to trial for plaintiffs with mesothelioma.

In addition, California’s laws are more favorable to mesothelioma plaintiffs than the laws of some other states. Some of the other states with the largest number of asbestos lawsuits have passed legislation to restrict access to the judicial system for people who have been injured by exposure to toxic asbestos fibers,  or limit the damages they can recover or make suing more difficult.

For example, after Texas defendants lost lots of mesothelioma lawsuits in the late 1990s, the state passed laws that limit the legal liability of the corporations responsible for negligently exposing people to asbestos. When one of these corporations merges with another company or is sold, their responsibility for paying the damages they owe is reduced in Texas.

Who Can File a California Mesothelioma Lawsuit

Among the restrictions placed on asbestos litigation by some states are laws that limit or bar out-of-state residents from filing mesothelioma lawsuits. There are no such restrictions in California. Anyone can file a California mesothelioma lawsuit if the facts are right.

Your location and the expense of travel should not stop you from filing a California mesothelioma lawsuit. When you work with a top-notch asbestos law firm, your lawyer will travel to your location to meet with you. Kazan Law lawyers regularly meet with clients outside California, sometimes traveling across the country to work with people who have mesothelioma. We believe you can contribute more to the success of your mesothelioma lawsuit if you are able to rest in the comfort of your own home.

The bottom line is that California mesothelioma lawsuits are often more successful and usually deliver larger verdicts. California juries really understand the claims of plaintiffs who are terminally ill because of the negligent actions of corporations who valued corporate profits over workers’ health.

Even if your California mesothelioma lawsuit settles before going to trial, your settlement may be larger in California. Defendants know that a trial in a California court is likely to go against them. This gives them an incentive to agree to a more favorable settlement.

In addition, some of the top asbestos law firms in the country like Kazan Law are based in California. When you choose a lawyer to represent you in your California mesothelioma lawsuit, you can choose from among the best.

Your mesothelioma lawsuit can provide the financial stability to comfort you during your illness and provide for your family once you are gone. Where you file – and what law firm you choose to represent you – can make the difference of millions of dollars in the settlement or jury verdict you receive. Picking a law firm can be the most important financial decision of your life. That is yet another reason to file a California mesothelioma lawsuit.

Justice in California

There is one more good reason to file a California mesothelioma lawsuit. It’s not about money – although your compensation is important. It’s about right and wrong and justice for the next generation of mesothelioma sufferers.

When you bring a corporation to trial in California, you make it more expensive for that corporation to do the wrong thing. There are certainly still plenty of bad corporations in the world. There are some that are actively poisoning and harming people with toxic chemicals at this moment. But the more we hold those corporations to account for their actions, the less economic incentive they have to cut corners on safety.

When you file a California mesothelioma lawsuit, you aren’t just asking for compensation for your own injuries and money to replace the income your family is losing. You are standing up for the next generations so they have safer workplaces with better protections from asbestos and other toxic substances. Your lawsuit might just save someone else’s life!

source: kazanlaw.com

How Does an Asbestos Lawsuit Begin?

If you or a member of your family has been diagnosed with mesothelioma, asbestos-caused lung cancer, or another asbestos-related disease, you may want to consider filing an asbestos lawsuit. Because of the clear connection between the negligent use of asbestos by US industries and mesothelioma, many people have filed lawsuits and won compensation for their injuries.

The first thing you can do to help make your asbestos lawsuit a success is to hire the best asbestos attorney you can find, one with a great deal of experience in filing asbestos lawsuits. The next thing you can do is to learn about the process so you can best help your lawyer make your case.




Collect Your Asbestos Lawsuit Documents

In order to file an asbestos lawsuit on your behalf, your attorney will need proof of your diagnosis and the state of your health, as well as the cost of your medical treatment so far. In addition, your attorney will need to know your work history, to determine where you may have been exposed to asbestos. Top-notch asbestos law firms employ experienced investigators. An investigator will use your background information to gather evidence about where you were exposed to asbestos.

If this seems like an overwhelming amount of work, especially as you are coping with a severe illness, don’t worry. A good mesothelioma attorney will go over everything with you and will be able to help gather the documents you need for your asbestos lawsuit.

Beginning Your Asbestos Lawsuit

Before beginning the formal litigation process, your attorney may approach representatives from some of the corporations responsible for your asbestos-related disease. Some parties choose to enter into settlement negotiations with the most well respected mesothelioma attorneys before a lawsuit is filed, to avoid the time and expense of going to court. Instead some corporations ask us NOT to sue them so they can settle without wasting money on their lawyers.

If any of the parties have set up an asbestos trust fund, your attorney will initiate the trust paperwork. The corporations with asbestos bankruptcy trusts can’t be named in an asbestos lawsuit. They have already admitted their liability for exposing people to asbestos and have set aside money under court supervision to compensate those who become ill with mesothelioma or other asbestos-related diseases.

The parties who don’t agree to compensate you will be named in your asbestos lawsuit. Your lawyer will draft a complaint, which states the facts of the case and identifies all the parties in the lawsuit.

Your lawyer will file the complaint and get a summons from the court to serve on the parties named in the suit. These parties, now called the defendants, must file an answer with the court within 30 days. If any of the defendants do not respond to your lawsuit within the required time, your lawyer can seek a default judgment against that party. After a default is entered, your attorney will pursue that party for compensation.

Defendants always respond by denying that they are liable for exposing you to asbestos. Some may argue that your illness is caused by other factors, such as smoking. This push back is a normal part of the litigation process. An experienced asbestos attorney will have heard all these arguments before and will know how to respond to them.

Asbestos Lawsuit Discovery

The next phase of your asbestos lawsuit is called the discovery process. During this phase, both your attorney and the attorneys for the defendants will ask for documents and other evidence about the case. The defense will want copies of your medical records. Your asbestos lawyer will ask for information about the use of products containing asbestos at different places where you worked or lived, who sold them, and what they knew.

Part of the discovery process is taking depositions. Depositions do not take place in a courtroom, but they are sworn testimony recorded by a court reporter that may be used in court during the trial.

It is likely that the defendants will ask for your deposition. This may sound scary, but it doesn’t have to be. Your lawyer will work with you beforehand to prepare you to testify and will be right by your side every minute. If your health is failing, the deposition is a chance to record your account of your asbestos exposure and illness. Later on, if you are unable to come to court to testify at trial, a recording of your deposition may be played instead,  and will become evidence.

The discovery process can take several months. At times, you may feel that your lawsuit has stalled and that nothing is happening. For much of this time, however, your legal team will actually be hard at work. They will be combing through the documents received from the defendants through discovery, looking for evidence to bolster your asbestos lawsuit.

Will Your Asbestos Lawsuit Settle or Go to Trial?

Television likes the drama of the courtroom, but most people who get sued do not. Most lawsuits end with a settlement before trial. Asbestos lawsuits are no different: more than 90%  end with a settlement and never go through trial.

The discovery process plays a big part in settlement negotiations. If the documents received through this process show that a defendant knew about the hazards of asbestos exposure and did nothing to protect you and others, that party is unlikely to win at trial. They may choose to settle with you to avoid the cost of trial, as well as the embarrassment of having their misconduct exposed.

If you are offered a settlement by one or more of the defendants in your asbestos lawsuit, your attorney will negotiate the settlement amount and will help you assess whether the offer is fair. The advantage of settling is that you will receive compensation much sooner than if your case goes to trial. If you win at trial, a jury may award you more money than you would get from a settlement. There is no guarantee, however, of winning at trial, or getting more than what was offered, so settlement may be a good idea.

Seek advice from an experienced asbestos attorney as soon as you are able. That is the best way to get your asbestos lawsuit off to a smooth start and heading to a good result.

source: kazanlaw.com

Too much ice? Customer fumes over coffee shop’s cold drink

Not even an ice cold frappé can ‘cool down’ a customer of Starbucks after she filed a $5-million (PhP 235 million) lawsuit at the Northern Illinois Federal Court, Chicago, United States, against the coffee shop company last week.

According to The Telegraph, the case was filed by Stacy Pincus, wherein she lamented that the chilled drinks served by the company only had accurate fluid ounces once ice cubes were dunked.
The 29-page complaint, obtained by Courthouse News Service, stated that “Starbucks is advertising the size of its Cold Drink cups on its menu, rather than the amount of fluid a customer will receive when they purchase a Cold Drink — and deceiving its customers in the process.”

“A Venti cold drink, for example, is advertised as having 24 fluid ounces, but only includes 14 ounces of the actual liquid, the rest is ice.”

Jamie Riley, a spokesperson for Starbucks, said the company is aware of Pincus’ grudges but finds the lawsuit ‘absurd’.

In an interview with American show TMZ, Riley defended, “Our customers understand and expect that ice is an essential component of any ‘iced’ beverage. If a customer is not satisfied with their beverage preparation, we will gladly remake it,” she noted. Gianna Francesca Catolico

source: business.inquirer.net

Microsoft sues US over secret demands for customer data

SAN FRANCISCO — Microsoft is suing the government over a federal law that lets authorities examine its users’ email or online files without their knowledge.

It’s the latest conflict between the tech industry and U.S. officials over individual privacy rights. Law enforcement officials want freedom to view a treasure trove of information — including emails, photos and financial records — that customers are storing on electronic gadgets and in so-called “cloud” computing centers.

Microsoft says the U.S. Justice Department is abusing the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act, which allows authorities to obtain court orders requiring it to turn over customer files stored on its servers, while in some cases prohibiting the company from notifying the customer. Microsoft says those “non-disclosure” orders violate its constitutional right to free speech, as well as its customers’ protection against unreasonable searches.

A Justice Department spokeswoman said the government is reviewing the lawsuit, which was filed Thursday in Seattle federal court.

One former federal official was critical of Microsoft’s position, saying it could lead to warning “child molesters, domestic abusers, violent criminals and terrorists that they’re being investigated.”

The non-disclosure orders must be granted by a judge who has concluded that “notifying these individuals will have an adverse result, which could include messing up an investigation or even endangering the life or safety of individuals,” said Daniel “D.J.” Rosenthal, a former National Security Council and Justice Department attorney.

But Microsoft argues the law sets a vague standard for granting secrecy around digital searches. Authorities are required to disclose most search warrants for information stored in filing cabinets, safes or other physical locations, the company noted in its court filing.

“At the end of the day, when you are being investigated by the government, you should know about the investigation so you can prepare a defense,” said Mark Jaycox of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group.

Microsoft said government demands under the ECPA law are increasing in number for a variety of investigations, including white-collar cases.

“We appreciate that there are times when secrecy around a government warrant is needed,” Microsoft Corp. President Brad Smith said in a statement. “But based on the many secrecy orders we have received, we question whether these orders are grounded in specific facts that truly demand secrecy. To the contrary, it appears that the issuance of secrecy orders has become too routine.”

The Redmond, Washington-based company says authorities used the law to demand customer information more than 5,600 times in the last 18 months. In nearly half those cases, a court ordered the company to keep the demand secret.

Although some orders expired after a period of time, Microsoft said the gag orders were indefinite in about 1,750 cases, “meaning that Microsoft could forever be barred from telling the affected customer about the government’s intrusion.”

As more people store data online, Microsoft argued in its lawsuit that the government is exploiting that trend “as a means of expanding its power to conduct secret investigations.”

In an interview, Smith said the company decided to sue the Justice Department after a case where authorities threatened to hold Microsoft in contempt when it sought to contest a particular secrecy order.

“That caused us to step back and take a look at what was going on more broadly,” he said. “We were very disconcerted when we added up the large number of secrecy orders we’ve been receiving.”

While the lawsuit specifically challenges ECPA’s secrecy provision, Congress has been debating a number of reforms in response to criticism that it’s outdated in various ways.

The House Judiciary Committee this week approved a bill to amend the law so authorities would need a warrant to see email and other digital files that have been stored online for more than 180 days. Currently the law allows access with a subpoena, which can be obtained more easily by satisfying a weaker legal standard.

But a recent amendment to the bill would still allow non-disclosure orders lasting up to six months, which could potentially be extended. Microsoft’s Smith said he’s not optimistic that Congress will pass any reforms this year.

Microsoft rival Apple has been waging a high-profile legal battle over the FBI’s attempt to compel that company’s help in obtaining data stored on iPhones.

“It’s part of the same trend,” said Alex Abdo, a staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union. He said tech companies “have gotten the message loud and clear from the American public, that privacy matters.”

source: technology.inquirer.net

US sues VW for at least $20 bn over emissions cheating

New York - The US government sued Volkswagen Monday for installing equipment on nearly 600,000 diesel cars that intentionally subverted clean-air regulations, resulting in excess harmful emissions.

Civil penalties in the lawsuit, filed by the Justice Department on behalf of the Environmental Protection Agency, could run well above $20 billion, according to the suit.

The complaint alleges that the big German automaker intentionally installed "defeat devices" on its diesel VWs, Audis and Porsches that met tough US environmental tests during official reviews, but spewed up to 40 times the legal levels of poisonous pollutants when on the road.

The Justice Department did not specify a specific overall penalty it was seeking.
But it laid out per-car penalties of up to $37,500, and up to $2,750 per defeat device, which could take the cost of the suit for VW to well past $20 billion.

"Car manufacturers that fail to properly certify their cars and that defeat emission control systems breach the public trust, endanger public health and disadvantage competitors," said assistant attorney general John Cruden.

"The United States will pursue all appropriate remedies against Volkswagen to redress the violations of our nation’s clean air laws alleged in the complaint."

Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for enforcement and compliance assurance at EPA, said the lawsuit would hold Volkswagen accountable and set the case on a "path to resolution."

"So far, recall discussions with the company have not produced an acceptable way forward," Giles said. "These discussions will continue in parallel with the federal court action."  — Agence France-Presse

source: gmanetwork.com

Finding the Best Lawyer for Your Car Accident Case

If you have sustained injuries in a car accident caused by another person’s negligence, you have the right to seek compensation for your injuries and damages.

To ensure that your legal rights are protected, consult with a St. Louis car accident lawyer to represent your case. The lawyer that you hire should be experienced in litigation of car accident cases, should be able to assess the positives and negatives of your case, and be able to guide you through the compensation process.

Looking for a St. Louis Car Accident Lawyer

Identifying potential candidates is the first step in finding the best lawyer for your case. Referrals can be sought from friends, family members, and associates, or you can go online and search for a suitable candidate on various legal referral websites. Once you have identified lawyers who suit your requirements, ask for an initial consultation visit with each one of them. The purpose of a consultation visit is to decide whether you want to hire the particular lawyer or not. Ask about his or her qualifications and experience, especially in personal injury cases. Explain your case and understand all the possible outcomes of the case. The mode of payment for the lawyer’s services should also be discussed. Once you have met all the candidates, assess and compare the strengths and weaknesses of all the lawyers. The following checklist may be of help to make an informed decision.

1. Experience

The experience of the lawyer in handling similar cases is important. Ask yourself whether the lawyer understands the legal issues pertaining to your case and is familiar with the other players that will be encountered in the process of the lawsuit.

2. Legal Strategy

The legal strategy of the lawyer explains how he or she intends to proceed with your case. You should ask yourself whether you agree with the legal strategy proposed and if the legal strategy is realistic or not. Make sure you understand all the possible legal outcomes of the case.

3. Billing Rates

Most Missouri car accident lawyers charge their customers on a contingent fee basis. There are others who charge by the hour. There may be other legal expenses associated with your case. Estimate the total cost and ask yourself whether you can afford the expenses. The lawyer’s rates and the extra fees that must be paid should also be taken into consideration.

4. Comfort Level

A lawsuit can extend for a prolonged period of time. It is essential that you are comfortable with the lawyer. Did the lawyer address all your concerns and can you trust the legal advice provided by the lawyer?

source: hoffmannpersonalinjury.com

Beastie Boys fire back over toy company parody

OAKLAND, California — The Beastie Boys are firing back after an Oakland toy company sued them over a video parody of their song "Girls."

The two surviving members of the rap trio filed a lawsuit of their own Tuesday in Oakland federal court claiming toy company GoldieBlox unfairly used the popular song as a jingle to sell its products.

GoldieBlox filed the first lawsuit last month seeking a court order allowing it to use the online video parody. The video shows young girls singing about engineering. The company said it filed the lawsuit after the band threatened it with litigation over the parody.

The video has since been removed from YouTube.



GoldieBlox claims the parody wasn't used to sell its product and that it has done nothing illegal. —Associated Press

source: gmanetwork.com

Obama administration overturns ban on some iPad, iPhones

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration has overturned a U.S. trade panel's ban on the sale of some older iPhones and iPads, reversing a ruling that had favored Samsung Electronics Co Ltd over Apple Inc in their long-running patent battles.

The U.S. International Trade Commission in June banned the import or sale of the iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS, iPad 3G and iPad 2 3G distributed by AT&T Inc, saying the devices infringed a patent owned by the South Korean electronics giant.

U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman on Saturday vetoed the ban, saying his decision was in part based on its "effect on competitive conditions in the U.S. economy and the effect on U.S. consumers." He said Samsung could continue to pursue its case through the courts.

Samsung said it was "disappointed" at the lifting of the ban. "The ITC's decision correctly recognized that Samsung has been negotiating in good faith and that Apple remains unwilling to take a license," it said in a statement.

Apple welcomed the news and applauded the administration "for standing up for innovation." It added, "Samsung was wrong to abuse the patent system in this way."

The Apple products targeted by the ITC ban are more than a year old, though some models such as the iPhone 4 remain solid sellers. Apple sells more than 100 million iPhones annually, but it does not break down sales by models.

Apple and Samsung have been waging a global patent war since 2010, filing multiple lawsuits against each other over the design and functionality of their devices.

This ITC ban is specific to a Samsung patent on technology that allows devices to transmit multiple services simultaneously and correctly through 3G wireless technology.

Such patents are called "standard essential patents" and they cover technology that must be used to comply with standards set by industry organizations.

The Obama administration has been pressing for most infringements of standard essential patents to be punished by monetary fines instead of sales injunctions.

Froman on Saturday said the ITC should thoroughly examine the public interest ramifications of its rulings in disputes over standard essential patents.

Designed to be a trade panel, the ITC has become a popular venue for patent lawsuits because it acts relatively quickly and can order import bans, which are more difficult to get from district courts.

While the ITC was created to ensure that U.S. companies can compete fairly against imports, a number of foreign companies with U.S. manufacturing plants have filed patent complaints with the agency. Samsung has a plant in Austin, Texas.

ITC cases can be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and from there to the Supreme Court.

Apple has a parallel complaint filed against Samsung at the ITC, accusing the South Korean company of copying the iPhone and iPad. An ITC judge in that case found that Samsung had violated four out of six patents listed in the complaint. A final decision is due in August.

Samsung makes phones that run on Google Inc's Android operating software, the market leader. Apple has also sued other Android phone makers including HTC Corp for patent infringement.

The case at the International Trade Commission was No. 337-794.  — Reuters

source: gmanetwork.com

Moody's, S&P, Morgan Stanley settle subprime mortgage investment suits

NEW YORK - Credit ratings agencies Moody's and Standard & Poor's, and investment bank Morgan Stanley have reached agreements to settle two lawsuits on accusations that they hid the risk of "subprime" mortgage investments to customers.

The lawsuits, one from King County in northwestern US state of Washington, the other from Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank, and which date back to before the 2008 economic meltdown, were dismissed by a Manhattan federal court, according to a court filing late Friday.

The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants failed to properly disclose the risk of their investment in a fund that bought bonds backed by subprime mortgages.

The McGraw-Hill Companies, the parent company of Standard and Poor's, told AFP that it ended the two disputes without admitting guilt or responsibility, and that the terms of the agreement were confidential.

Spokespeople for Morgan Stanley and Moody's were not immediately available for comment.

The trial was especially crucial for S&P: on February 5 the US Justice Department filed a lawsuit seeking at least $5 billion in civil penalties for losses due to inflated ratings of mortgage bonds.

The suit claims that S&P knowingly exaggerated the ratings on financial securities, misrepresenting their true credit risk.

The suit cited S&P's top-grade ratings of dozens of mortgage-based collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) issued in early 2007 that were in default within one year, some within six months.

The defaults dealt billions of dollars in losses to financial institutions insured by the US government, some of which collapsed in the 2008 crisis and others, like Citigroup, forced to seek a government bailout.

S&P was specifically charged with wire fraud, mail fraud and financial institution fraud. — Agence France-Presse

source: gmanetwork.com