(360) 733-3773 Bellingham, WA

SHEPARD_ALLEN2

Archive for News – Page 77

Corvettes May Be the Most Admired But Not Best In Performance

Posted by David Brown 
· June 15, 2017 

Everyone has his or her taste of a vehicle they admire and imagine themselves driving. One of the most admired is the Corvette. However, it may turn out not to be the best regarding performance.

Reasons Offered

According to some complaints tabled in a Florida federal court by a group of the vehicle owners, the makers failed to include a good cooling system. These drivers alleged that the Corvette Z06 would overheat and automatically get to what they referred as “Limp Mode.” Despite the fact that the vehicle is meant to operate on high race track performance capabilities, the condition ends up reducing the speeds dramatically in an unexpected way.

Based on their field tests, these racetrack enthusiasts, the Plaintiffs, they would no longer drive at their average speed of 125 Mph. Reasons being that in a short duration of 15 Minutes, the vehicle would heat up and get into the Limp Mode. As a result, Corvette Z06 would lose its stability of operation. What is most astonishing is that the vehicle speeds would drastically drop without even a single warning to the driver or other users. There exists a high chances of this overheating extending to the vehicle engine.
The racetrack enthusiasts blame GM for disregarding more than 117 numbers of different state and government laws, including just to highlight a few, false covering, rupture of guarantee and unreasonable enhancement.

Corvette Z06 Expectations

From the vehicle owner’s point, Corvette Z06 was something entirely different from GM’s promise of a track car. Based on the promise and the marketing done by GM, most of them had expectations of a technologically advanced track vehicle. Much to their surprise, their expectations are not what they received. The most astonishing part is that GM has already been informed of the many defects of the vehicle, but no solutions came with the 2017 model. Despite that the production was halted for some time in an attempt to get a solution, all the company did was make some beautifications. On top of that, GM went ahead and warned the clients of their automatic transmissions overheating, as it was the case with the 2015 and 2016 models.

Categories : News
Tags : ,

7 Figure Verdict Against Toyota Over 2006 Crash

Posted by David Brown 
· June 13, 2017 

Accelerator defect! Well, watch out giving this excuse to the US federal courts now. Yeah! Because there has been an interesting development on the ’06 car crash related case that proved fatal. On Friday, the court had reached a decision and it was, to the astonishment of many, against the winds and the court decided to go slightly in favor of the victims of the crash saying that Toyota Motor Corp will pay an amount of $11 million. This case has been in the news for quite some time now as the incident occurred some 11 years ago in Minnesota, USA. The court made the judgment that the accident’s primary cause was the defect in the accelerator.

A US federal court panel comprising of three judges further stated that although in their opinion the driver should be blamed for the accident, although 60% of the problem was with the defective accelerator of the 1996 Camry. The panel on the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals subtly stated that the jury from Minnesota had ample evidence and in the year 2015 to come to the verdict that this tragic incident happened due to the fault of both the driver and the manufacturer of the car. They stated that Mr. Lee was only 40% liable for the incident yet he was sentenced and was sent to prison but Toyota Motor Corp is 60% liable.

Robert Hilliard, Mr. Lee’s lawyer, presented the argument that his client spent nearly three years in prison for a crime which he hadn’t committed. He further stated that he was released only when there were several reports of unintended acceleration in the vehicles from the same manufacturers. The reason for his release was the motion that he won in 2010.

The auto in the mishap was not secured by Toyota’s review of more than 10 million vehicles in the vicinity of 2009 and 2010 over increasing speed issues. Hilliard stated after the decision that he was not only grateful to the 8th Circuit but also relieved for the family of his client. The other side of the story is pretty daunting as well as the manufacturers of the car are still firmly claiming that the vehicle which was driven by Mr. Lee was completely fine and well designed. They also said that as the court has made its decision so they will respect it.

Unfortunately, the lawyer for the other injured people of the incident was unavailable for a comment but it is quite clear that the trial basically stemmed from the lawsuit which was filed mainly on behalf of the injured or deceased passengers. Mr. Lee had, later on, joined the lawsuit and repeatedly stated that it was completely unintentional and he felt extremely sorry for the family he crashed into. Having made the verdict, the 8th Circuit stated that improper calculations were made for the damages for the mother of those children in that vehicle and recalculations were ordered.

Categories : News
Tags :

Lawsuit against McDonald’s by Transgender—What Makes This Case Unique

Posted by David Brown 
· June 8, 2017 

Although other people have sued McDonald’s over sexual harassment, La’Ray Reed, a 25-year-old crew-member at a Redford, Michigan Mickey D’s, is alleging things and exposing issues that are unique.

 

What Are the Allegations?

 

Miss Reed, a transgender, alleges that:

  • She was a victim of not just verbal harassment but “physical”—i.e., involving being “groped” and touched inappropriately;
  • Both managers and fellow employees harassed her;
  • She did complain, only to be ignored, ridiculed, and, ultimately, fired;
  • She was denied access to both male and female bathrooms—instead forced to use a separate alternate, nasty-looking “closet” she was, to boot, forced to keep clean;
  • Her hours were cut short, was often sent home early, was denied contact with customers (instead being relegated to backroom duties), and was treated differently than other employees;
  • Inappropriate comments were routinely made against her;
  • She may have been singled-out because of her involvement with “Fight for $15,” an organization working to enhance/improve fast-food restaurants;
  • Abuse/discrimination led to depression and thoughts of suicide.

 

Why This Case May Have Serious Repercussions

 

Interestingly, McDonald’s has professed to be supportive of LGBT rights and, supposedly, has a zero-tolerance policy regarding discrimination.

 

Some of the legal and corporate-governance questions promising to heat things up include:

  1. Since this restaurant is a privately-owned franchise, to what extent can McDonald’s be held responsible?
  2. Will a settlement offer be made and accepted by Miss Reed or will this go to trial?
  3. Will the case go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, if necessary?
  4. How will this case affect the highly-charged environment involving sexual-identity/orientation rights?
  5. How will the Trump administration deal with cases like this?
  6. Will the federal government continue to allow states almost complete leeway regarding laws and policies on name and birth certificate changes, parental rights, and the other issues still-unresolved or only-partially-addressed?
  7. Will this case encourage more transgendered abuse victims to come forward?
  8. How many of Miss Reed’s allegations are true and to what extent will McDonald’s side with its franchisee?

 

Conclusion

Even if only half of Miss Reed’s allegations are true, this is still a very disturbing case. At the very least, McDonald’s may be motivated to more strongly enforce its corporate policies; more importantly, Miss Reed will get the justice all citizens deserve.

Categories : News
Tags : ,

Adventist Church Hit with Lawsuit after Ignoring Teacher Abuse Claims

Posted by David Brown 
· June 6, 2017 

A lawsuit filed against the Seventh Day Adventist Church in the Seattle area claims the church ignored warnings for years about a teacher who was allegedly sexually abusing students and taught at the church’s schools in Washington and California.

The lawsuit was filed by the David Law Group of Seattle on behalf of victims of the abuse and says that the Seventh Day Adventists received a complaint about Douglas “John” Allison as early as December 2014 and the church ignored it.

The initial complaint followed an alleged incident in Crescent City, California, according to a document provided by the Del Norte Department of Health and Human Services. This incident involved Allison inappropriately touching a female student on multiple occasions and putting his hand down the front of her pants.

Allison was eventually arrested for sexual assault last year in a case separate from the incident in Crescent City. Allison, a principal and one of two teachers at Mountain View Christian School in Sequim, was accused of sexually assaulting two 10 year olds under his desk. According to police reports and the lawsuit, this happened when the other children in the class were distracted watching movies. He was convicted of the crime charged in the Sequim case and is now serving a 26-year prison sentence.

Also in the lawsuit filed in King County, church leaders in Washington and California are accused of having received reports from parents multiple times that showed concern for Allison’s inappropriate behavior of hugging and touching students at the schools. It is not clear what, if any, disciplinary actions or investigations of claims took place following any of the complaints or if any investigation followed the initial Crescent City complaint.

The church has not seen the lawsuit filing yet, which was filed on June 15, and is not making a comment at this time, according to Heidi Baumgartner, a spokesperson for the Western Corporation of the Seventh Day Adventists.

The victim’s family has asked for privacy and is not speaking publicly about the case, according to the Davis Law Group.

Parents are encouraged to communicate with their children about appropriate and inappropriate school behavior, and to report any incidents of abuse to the proper authorities.

Categories : News
Tags : ,

The Festival of Broken Promises

Posted by David Brown 
· May 30, 2017 

Social media stars such as Kendell Jenner promoted the The Frye Festival which was said to be “the culture event of the decade.”  Who wouldn’t want to be on a secluded island, stay in luxury accommodations, eat great food made by top chefs and hear music from bands for the standard fee. If a festival goer wanted to kick $250 more they could rent a boat or jet ski. For $2,500 partiers could dock a yacht, of course they had to bring their own yacht to do so. For an extra $25,000 Frye attendees could stay on a ship with a full staff. With the base ticket being $1,500 with each of the extras being per individual person it can add up quick.

Many tickets sold in the  $250,000 range, making this Festival one of the most expensive in decades.

With everything being offered and the individuals willing to spend their money.  Why are organizers, Ja Rule and Billy McFarland now being sued to the tune of $100 million dollars? The answer is that attendees were not met with luxury getaway promised. Festival goers found out in a short period of time that they did not get what they paid for and even worse many were unable to leave with limited shelter, food, medical care, water and organization in general on the island. Obviously this caused a panic. The promised remote island had a hotel on it. Their luxury lodging was explained by attendees as “FEMA tents” many of which were still not set up. The food meant for a king also did not meet the standard expected with Festival goers as they were served ham and cheese sandwiches with a side salad in Styrofoam. But wait they still had the band right? Nope, they all canceled as well.

What happens with the case remains to be seen with several willing to apologize, but nobody seems to be willing to take blame. It’s safe to say there will unlikely be another Frye Festival anytime soon if ever. It remains to be seen however if individuals no matter their financial status will take the time to research future events prior to committing to such an event.

Categories : News
Tags : ,

Talc: Why Johnson & Johnson May (or May Not) Get Dusted

Posted by David Brown 
· May 25, 2017 

Johnson & Johnson’s (JNJ: NYSE) “powder problem” just won’t go away. While the Company asserts that there is no connection between its products and ovarian cancer, jury after jury seems to disagree. The monetary awards to plaintiffs are mounting, but so far there has been no payout. So, what is the current state of JNJ’s “particle predicament”?

Right now, Johnson & Johnson has nearly 1,200 lawsuits pending over talc. Most of these suits allege that JNJ did not disclose known potential problems with the silicate, problems of which the Company has been aware for years. If that is the case, the matter might ultimately end up one of the cover-up being worse than the crime. But, is there really a “crime”?

There is certainly no clear verdict on whether talc causes ovarian cancer. One theory suggests that DNA changes over a women’s life may be related to ovarian cancer development. And, talc use could be a catalyst. However, according to the American Cancer Society, “studies haven’t been able to specifically link any single chemical in the environment or in our diets to mutations that cause ovarian cancer. The cause of most acquired mutations remains unknown.”

But, an analysis done by Johnson & Johnson, itself, seems to be the most problematic. As previously reported by AP, the conclusion states, in its author’s opinion, that “’anybody who denies (the) risks’ between ‘hygienic’ talc use and ovarian cancer will be publicly perceived in the same light as those who denied a link between smoking cigarettes and cancer: ‘denying the obvious in the face of all evidence to the contrary.’”

How has all of this affected JNJ’s marketplace performance? Looking at the chart of its share price over the last several years, not much. Here is a recent chart from Fidelity:

 

Additionally, in April, the Company announced an increased quarterly dividend of 5% from 80 cents per share to 84 cents per share. So, while the lawsuits are mounting, with JNJ spending more time defending them, the marketplace does not yet seem worried. Is this something that the Company will eventually overcome? Right now, it’s hard to say. Time will tell whether this is just a dusting for JNJ or a fatal cancer that won’t go away.

Categories : News
Tags : ,

San Bernardino attack Victims Sue Google, Facebook, Twitter over aiding Terrorism

Posted by David Brown 
· May 18, 2017 

Family members of the San Bernardino attack victims are suing Twitter, Facebook and Google accusing them of providing platforms that aid terrorists. The lawsuit filed on behalf of families of three of the victims of the December 2nd attack mirrors similar suits filed in cases involving terror attacks in Orlando and Dallas. The Lawsuit filed in a Los Angeles’ Federal court accuses the 3 tech giants of aiding and supporting terrorism by providing material support to these groups and are liable for the death of several victims of the December 2, 2015, attack.

The ISIS supposedly inspired Tashfeen Malik and Syed Rizwan Farook, the couple that carried out the attack. According to authorities, Malik had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State Group on her Facebook page around the shooting time, which wounded 22 people.

The same law firm filing this suit has sued the same companies severally, with some of their lawsuits being dismissed because federal laws shield online providers from taking responsibility for the content posted by their users.

The lawsuit claims that without YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook, the tremendous growth of the Islamic State Group would not have been remotely possible. It also claims the tech giants are liable for aiding & abetting acts of terrorism as well as providing support to designated foreign terror groups.

The law filed against the tech giants was on behalf of Tin Nguyen, Nicholas Thalasinos, and Sierra Clayborn, who were among the 14 killed by the terrorist duo of Tashfeen Malik and Syed Rizwan Farook. On Dec. 2nd, the couple targeted a Christmas party in San Bernardino that left 14 people dead and 22 others injured.

Currently, Facebook and Twitter claim to be doing everything in their power to prevent such instances where terror groups use their sites. All three companies have expressed their sympathy to the victims of the unfortunate event, and they have stated that they are not liable for the terror attack. They also argued that the families of the victims relied on a speculative chain of events to blame the tech giants for gunmen’s self-radicalization.

The companies further stated that accepting such claims would expose online platforms to possible liability for every terrorist attack in the world. Simply because the terrorist are affiliated with the online platforms does not mean that they supported the terror attack.

Shortly after the attack, James Comey-FBI Director- said that there was connected to a larger terror network although there were signs foreign terrorist organizations inspired them. Comey also said that the internet allows the opportunity for users to consume information and radicalizes.

Investigators also uncovered private messages sent by Malik to a Facebook group of Pakistani friends, pledging her support for Islamic Jihads and expressed her desire to join their fight. On the day before the shooting, Malik used Facebook to pledge her allegiance to ISIS. Facebook stated that they saw they post and alerted the FBI before they took it down.

Categories : News
Tags : , , ,

3 Key Legal Provisions regarding Domestic Abuse

Posted by David Brown 
· May 16, 2017 

Domestic violence has been rampant in many countries hence there is a need for enforcement of  laws governing family disputes. The legal channels are made to assist in solving conflicts in your family,and also to ensure laws are adhered to  accordingly. The primary importance of law enforcement is to make sure you get justice. Below are some national provisions governing families.

Violence Against Women Act

This regulation curbs women from mistreatment and domestic abuse.If you are a woman the act is meant for you,since it was set to reduce chances of domestic violence against women. The likelihood of ill-treatment against women became minor as the law came in to assist in the matter. This act supports  a woman who falls victim to ensure they are secured, and an immediate action is taken against an individual mistreating you as a woman. The legal regulation protect abused spouses where there is a clear prove that there was an act of violence. The abuser is eligible for criminal charges and may be requested to provide monetary assistance in hospitalizing you incase you are injured.

Child Custody and Domestic Violence Act

When child abuse occurs in your family, an immediate action should be taken to provide safety for your child. The court deprives a spouse who falls  victim the right of parenting the child. The law awards the other spouse full custody of the child. Although in many scenarios a mother is considered more caring, there is a possibility of the father being the most appropriate candidate.If your partner molest your child,take legal action against him or her.

Divorce Proceedings Act

A family disagreement may result in separation due to many reasons. Abuse of a spouse or unfaithfulness by your partner  may prompt you  to take a divorce case to  court of law. The court requires a clear evidence of the cause for the divorce.  There must be involvement of a lawyer in the divorce proceedings, and the court’s judge gives the final say regarding the divorce.If you were initiating the divorce,you must involve a witness, marks left, or photographic to help in the judgment.

The laws governing domestic violence are helpful in securing every family member. Every country has laws defending all citizens even in the families. This ensures justice prevails in every sector. The law protects every of the family member bringing peace and harmony to the family.

Categories : News
Tags :

Texas Borderland Owners Block Trump’s Wall

Posted by David Brown 
· May 11, 2017 

Los Ebanos, Texas. — One obstacle to President Trump’s pledged border wall is a little park in Los Ebanos. Aleida Garcia and her husband have converted part of their 30-acre property into the small park, which features a panoramic vista over the Rio Grande Valley. About ten years ago, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), under George W. Bush’s 2008 Secure Fence Act, attempted to seize that part of the Garcia’s land to build a border wall. The family fought the government in court, and DHS finally dropped the case just this year.

But, Mrs. Garcia has reportedly acknowledged to the New York Times (NYT) that President Trump’s plans might once again put her family’s property in jeopardy. “We’re just waiting…”, she reported told the NYT reporter. The Garcias are braced to resist all renewed federal attempts to take the property through eminent domain actions. And, they’ve got help. In at least ninety lawsuits, landowners have been battling government attempts to seize of their properties in in southern Texas since 2008.

Numerous Texas politicians support the private litigants. After all, in Texas, private ownership of land is held as a rather sacred right. State Representative Henry Cuellar reportedly stated to the NYT, “Here in Texas, we take the concept of private property very seriously,” And, he asserted, “Texans stand up for ourselves when the federal government tries to take what is ours.” This widespread local legal opposition to the border wall could frustrate construction plans for years as lawsuits grind through the courts.

But, both President Trump and Homeland Security Secretary, John Kelly have asserted that the wall can be built within 24 months. However, the recently passed Congressional spending bill does not include any allocation of funds for the wall construction. Now, newly surfacing legal disputes, along with the existing cases, and the absence of funding, all together make the president’s projected timeframe improbable—especially since the Texas landowners’ mission is to block construction by staying in court until Trump is out of office.

The Texan property owners are sharply aware that their region is a passage for drug smugglers. Some residents have even been crime victims. Yet, their group presents one of the president’s strongest challenges to building a border wall. They maintain that there is already heavy border security, in the form of patrolling by federal and local authorities and drones. They argue that the wall would be of little added security value. Their position is that their land would be lost for a wall that would be of merely symbolic effect.

Categories : News
Tags :

Case of the Unicorn Frappuccino: Cafe Sues Starbucks Over Trademark

Posted by David Brown 
· May 9, 2017 

With pink and blue rainbow swirls, it was playfully eye-catching. And Starbucks staffers had a field day promoting the Unicorn Frappuccino over social media.

But a cafe known as The End Brooklyn was not amused.

The End serves up healthful drinks in coffee cups to customers in New York City’s trendy Williamsburg area. And it filed a lawsuit that accuses Starbucks of grabbing its own Unicorn Latte idea.

The End hasn’t trademarked its Unicorn Latte, so a trademark infringement challenge is a long shot. Yet The End’s parent company, Montauk Juice Factory, has had an application for “Unicorn Latte” pending since January with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

A Unicorn Latte at The End contains dates, vanilla bean, ginger, lemon juice, cashews, and maca root. The End applies natural colors to the whipped cuppa, delighting customers with artistic flourishes. Starbucks, in turn, whipped up a drink concept with similar pastel hues, and sold it under the name Unicorn Frappuccino. Or, in the branding language of Starbucks, Unicorn Frappuccino® Blended Crème.

The End sees Starbucks as usurping the idea’s appeal, as customers now associate unicorn cafe drinks with the bigger chain.

Starbucks has fired back at the smaller company. It credits social media users’ excitement over “fun, spirited and colorful unicorn-themed” products for inspiration. Starbucks is well known for marketing to young adults by showing off its Frappuccino lines on social media. And Starbucks points out that its swirly pink and blue model has already finished its limited run, which played out in April.

But Montauk Juice Factory wants compensation and an apology, claiming that Starbucks took an unfair competitive advantage. It insists that the social media buzz for unicorn-themed cafe drinks was its own handiwork — and Starbucks pounced on it.

While the two companies face off over their rights to their pink and blue concoctions, they’re certainly not the only food and drink industry players to seize upon the popularity of unicorns. Indeed, Bangkok is home to the Unicorn Cafe, which attracts international swoons with its all-things-unicorn theme.

In any case, Starbucks likely regards the whole trademark argument as a tempest in a teacup. It’s now selling Dragon Frappuccino.

Categories : News
Tags : ,
« Previous Page
Next Page »

Bellingham Office:

2011 Young Street
Suite 202
Bellingham, WA  98225
(360) 733-3773 or 647-4567
(360) 647-9060 (facsimile)
info@saalawoffice.com

shepard_allen