Daily Fantasy Sports Lawsuit is a Swing and a Miss for Fans

Even though sports fans have been starved for live-action in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a strikeout recorded of sorts earlier this April in a federal district court. Taking place in New York, the case was Olson v. MLB. Mr. Olson is a daily fantasy sports player who brought a lawsuit against two of the biggest teams in all of baseball, the Houston Astros and the Boston Red Sox, who have both won World Series titles recently. They have also been widely linked to the sign-stealing scandal that has plagued the MLB for the past few months.

During the sign-stealing scandal, players in the dugout would be using video cameras to watch the signs the catcher puts down, indicating the pitch. Then, players in the dugout would bang on a garbage can. This would let the batter know if a breaking ball was coming or not. This advantage makes it easier for the player to make solid contact with the ball. Presumably, this helped both teams to their World Series titles.

In the lawsuit, Olson alleged that the sign-stealing scheme breached a duty of care held by the MLB that they needed to ensure the games were being played within the rules. He alleged that this impacted his daily fantasy sports winnings. It turns out that the court was not buying his argument.

In a decision that was well-reasoned, the federal court granted the motion put forth by the defendants to dismiss the lawsuit. This relegated Olson to the long list of sports consumers, fans, and spectators who have tried to sue sports leagues in the past for a variety of reasons.

When it comes to sports fans, everyone experiences the agony of defeat and the jubilation of victory; however, there is no duty on behalf of the sports leagues to compensate fans who feel cheated out of their enjoyment in some way. Numerous complaints have been taken up over the years, even by customers who have bought tickets. This decision simply falls in line with what courts have found in the past. It will be interesting to see if fans continue to try to sue sports leagues in the future.

Common Misconceptions in Personal Injury Cases

Unfortunately, an accident can happen at any time. Many people suffer injuries in these accidents. These injuries can be costly between doctors’ bills, surgical costs, repair bills, and potential lost income due to time off from work. Fortunately, there is a path for people to seek financial compensation following a serious injury; however, the portrayal that many people see on TV when it comes to personal injury lawsuits is not usually accurate. In order for someone to seek financial compensation for their injuries, they will need to provide ample evidence and demonstrate that they have met significant burdens of proof to win a financial award. There are a few common misconceptions that need to be corrected.

First, there is a common misconception that people can collect money just by having any type of pain. This is not always the case. While it is relatively straightforward for people to talk to an insurance company and collect compensation for medical bills and lost wages, collecting compensation for pain and suffering is significantly more difficult. There are three types of injury categories following a major accident that someone for which can collect pain and suffering compensation. These include loss of bodily limbs, loss of bodily function, and wrongful death claims (collected by surviving kin). If any of these events took place, it is possible to collect more money for pain and compensation.

Next, many people believe that if they drag out the lawsuit, they are more likely to collect more money. This is not the case. In reality, it will be a hassle to continue to chase down the other party in a lawsuit. They are simply going to become aggravated and will be less likely to communicate in a professional manner. Furthermore, this is also more likely to drive up the attorneys’ fees, which may detract from the overall award. Finally, plaintiffs will also need to track every receipt. The longer the case goes on, the more likely it is that some of these will be lost.

Finally, many people think that they don’t need a lawyer. The reality is that lawyers are necessary to make sure that plaintiffs settle for an amount that is fair. This is important for making sure that everyone protects their rights, particularly in a case that involves a serious injury.


Covering the Cost of a Funeral in a Wrongful Death Lawsuit

Dealing with the wrongful death of a loved one can be a devastating situation. It is terrible to deal with the premature loss of a family member or friend and the final expenses following a wrongful death can be significant. One of the biggest expenses that people have to bear is that of a funeral. It is possible for someone to receive compensation for the costs of a funeral and burial; however, it is necessary to file a wrongful death lawsuit against the party who is at-fault in the case.

It is terrible to deal with the unexpected loss of a loved one and this is among the most challenging emotional experiences that someone can have. Funerals cost thousands of dollars and many people do not have this kind of money sitting in a savings account. Do you? Furthermore, if there are avenues to force the at-fault party to cover this cost, then this is only appropriate.

First, it is important for everyone to know what costs are covered by a wrongful death lawsuit. It is always important to speak with an experienced attorney because these cases are highly complex and people need to know what kind of compensation they can expect. Some of the costs include:

  • The cost of cremation services or a plot of land
  • The cost of the funeral and burial
  • Money paid for the tombstone and casket
  • Any rental fees for the funeral home, hearse, and other transportation arrangements

Therefore, it is important for everyone to track these costs so that the wrongful death lawsuit can be compensated appropriately. It is important for everyone to remember that they should not just accept a settlement because they need the money. An insurance company will try to force a quick payment to get away with paying less than is deserved. People need to be patient and wait for the outcome of the case. Even though this won’t be immediate, it is critical for everyone to fight for the compensation they deserve. Do not allow an insurance company to get away with taking advantage of someone’s grief. Following the loss of a loved one in a wrongful death scenario, filing a lawsuit is the most appropriate course of action.

Universal Music Group Scores Big Win in Lawsuit

Recently, Universal Music Group posted a big win in a legal dispute that has been going on since last year. A judge dismissed a lawsuit that had been fired over tapes that were destroyed in a fire. The event took place in 2008, with plaintiffs filing a class action suit against the famous company. Some of the plaintiffs included Soundgarden, Steve Earle, Hole, and the estate of Tupac Shakur. The decision was filed recently and brings an end to a legal battle that began about a year ago. At that time, The New York Times Magazine reported that there were significant damages in a fire that took place at Universal Music Group back in 2008, leading to the loss of more than 500,000 recordings.

Immediately after this, a lawsuit was filed against Universal Music Group. The lawsuit alleged that the company should have done more to prevent the fire. The lawsuit also accused Universal Music Group of trying to cover up the fire, concealing the extent of the destruction from the artists. At the same time, Universal Music Group was pursuing litigation and insurance claims in an effort to recoup their losses.

The lawsuit claimed that Universal Music Group took the settlement proceeds along with the insurance benefits. The total value was close to $150 million. The lawsuit filed by the plaintiffs was seeking half of this amount in addition to half of any additional losses they might have incurred.

A judge dismissed the vast majority of the claims in the lawsuit including allegations of negligence, reckless conduct, and breach of contract. Universal Music Group announced that the judge’s filing rejects the plaintiffs’ arguments and criticized The New York Times Magazine for the hyperbolic nature of their reporting. The vast majority of the plaintiffs have already dropped out of the suit. Those leaving the suit include Hole, Soundgarden, Tupac Shakur, and Earle. Tom Petty’s ex-wife is one of the few plaintiffs remaining in the case. Even though the judge has dismissed this claim, the plaintiffs have left the door open to bringing an additional lawsuit; however, it would have to be based on a new set of arguments. At this time, it appears unlikely. It will be interesting to see what moves Universal Music Group and the plaintiffs make next.

Dollar Tree Reaches Tentative Settlement in Lawsuit Involving Poor Timekeeping, Breaks for Employees

Dollar Tree, the company known for producing inexpensive goods in a variety of categories, recently requested approval for a significant settlement to bring an end to a lawsuit brought against it by employees. The plaintiffs in the suit, Snipes vs. Dollar Tree, have requested approval for a $2.5 million settlement that would bring an end to litigation. In the case, the plaintiffs alleged that Dollar Tree had committed wage violations. Some of the violations included not allowing employees to take proper rest breaks, allowing them to recharge and continue their shifts. The plaintiffs included anyone who worked at a distribution center as part of the Dollar Tree corporation between April of 2011 and the end of 2019.

The plaintiff who brought the suit against Dollar Tree is named Terry Snipes. He filed suit against the large corporation in April of 2015. The suit and class membership have been made more complicated by the employee arbitration program that has been set up by Dollar Tree.

The lead plaintiff decided to exit this program before he brought a lawsuit against the company. Back in May, a United States District Judge was asked by Dollar Tree to force the arbitration members that were signed by around 1,600 employees following the October 6, 2014 cutoff.

The judge agreed and forced the claims to head into arbitration if they signed arbitration pacts following the October cutoff; however, these employees are still allowed to have access to the settlement agreement.

In the original suit, the plaintiffs alleged that these accusations are a violation of California state law. The workers stated that the company did not give them appropriate breaks and maintained poor practices with regards to their timekeeping. The settlement amount is a big victory for the workers. The workers state that the settlement represents an outstanding result, given the relative strengths and weaknesses of the case. The settlement includes $125,000 towards claims under the California Private Attorneys General Act, more than $90,000 going towards the Labor and Workforce Development Agency, and $750,000 in fees for the legal team. The 2,400 members of the class action settlement will each get around $625 each. This is a major victory for workers in the state of California.

Immunity Law is Shielding Nursing Homes in NY in the Wake of COVID-19

As the COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic continues to ravage the country, there is one place where this virus is particularly deadly. This is in nursing homes. The virus is particularly deadly to those who are elderly and those with pre-existing conditions. Given that nursing homes are typically filled with elderly individuals who live in close proximity to one another, this places nursing homes at extreme risk of being harmed by COVID-19.

Sadly, thousands of elderly New Yorkers have already passed away from the virus. Many of these individuals are located in nursing homes. Furthermore, there is an immunity law in place that may shelter nursing homes from potential legal action and liability lawsuits.

The NY Immunity Law

Many of the nursing homes throughout NY are poorly staffed and undersupplied. This combination means that nursing homes may not be able to adequately care for and protect their residents as COVID-19 continues to spread. Recently, an immunity measure was passed which shields nursing homes from liability. While this relieves administrators, many advocates fear that this law is simply going to allow the nursing homes to hide behind the law in cases of neglect that may turn deadly.

In an executive order passed in March, the state of New York granted a significant shield to both nursing homes and their staff as they were desperately trying to procure enough equipment to adequately care for their residents. While this is admirable, this should have been done much sooner/ Now, with a pandemic that has killed thousands of people across the state, families may be out of options if they believe their loved one passed away due to negligence on behalf of the nursing home.

Other Options Are Available

There are still ways that a family can take legal action against a nursing home for the death of a loved one. If the nursing home doesn’t have enough PPE, they might be held liable in cases of gross negligence, reckless misconduct, or intentional harm. For example, if the nursing home never made an attempt to improve their situation, they could still be held liable for this gross dereliction of duty; however, this would be a high bar to clear.

Class Action Lawsuits Against China Resulting From Covid-19

The Chinese government is currently facing four different federal class-action lawsuits against them for their failure to maintain the COVID-19 outbreak. They also failed to inform all other communities outside of China of its potential dangers.

One of the lawsuits involve small businesses in California that have been impacted by COVID-19. An attorney who goes by the name Larry Klayman is in charge of one of the four class-action lawsuits that accuse China of letting out a biological weapon to society. The U.S. is hoping to be able to recover a large sum of money for damages. However, chances are slim for any such actions to take place. This is because there is a barrier that will not allow the Chinese to be brought into courts in the United States. The FSIA act will not allow U.S. lawsuits to become successful.

Some sources believe that these U.S. lawsuit allegations are false. Instead, the culprit of the COVID-19 outbreak in China started in a market in Wuhan. There is much negligence on their part though for not being able to contain the spread of the virus. Chinese government will have to bring on any allegations and lawsuits for commercial activity in China in order for them to be held accountable.

There is a possibility of these lawsuits not being successful in Wuhan since there are many improper practices and the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that institutes run by the government may not comply.

China would also have to inform people by giving a warning about COVID-19 in order for the lawsuits to be successful. However, the courts may not agree with this. The wrongdoing act caused by China would have also have had to happen in the United States.

Another California attorney by the name of Kent Schmidt expressed that there is no chance that federal judges would approve these class action lawsuits. They would need great evidence to prove that these lawsuits are doable even though many agreed that China was responsible for the spread of the virus.

Unfortunately, the courts in the U.S. are not in a position to address the effects of the COVID-19 here even though the harm done was a direct result of China. There are attorneys that disagree and are looking to take care of American’s who have been affected by COVID-19 financially.

Wrongful Death Attorney Hired in Wake of Police Chief Death

Last November, Police Chief Michael Knapp was killed in the line of duty. A reliable and dedicated public servant, he was struck by a maroon 1988 Chevrolet as he was crossing Fourth Street located in Lynden, WA. He was airlifted to a local hospital in nearby Seattle; however, he died of his injuries the next day. Now, his family has hired a wrongful death attorney to represent them in possible legal action in the wake of this tragedy.

A Career of Service

Police Chief Michael Knapp served as an inspiration to countless people in the local community. He started his career as an FBI special agent and this valuable experience eventually led to him serving as the Chief of Police for multiple cities including Medina, Lynden, Blaine, and Ferndale. He was known for his outstanding character and uncompromising adherence to his morals. He also served as a fantastic leader, inspiring generations of law enforcement professionals who still follow in his footsteps to this day. He was also the consummate professional, fueling love and respect in everyone with whom he came into contact.

Today, he is survived by his two grandchildren, his son-in-law, and his wife.

Proving a Wrongful Death Case

A wrongful death case is difficult to prove; however, this is an action that can be taken by the family or heirs of a person who was killed in either an intentional act or one of negligence. In this case, the family of Police Chief Michael Knapp may seek to hold the driver of the Chevrolet responsible for the death of their loved one. Even if the driver was not intentionally trying to kill the police chief, they may seek to claim that he was negligent when he struck a pedestrian crossing Fourth Street in Lynden, WA.

The goal of any wrongful death case is to fairly and justly compensate family members and heirs for the death of a loved one. For example, they might lose financial support because their loved one is unable to work. There might also be medical expenses and final expenses that place the family in a challenging financial position.

The story of this dedicated public servant’s death is heartbreaking. Hopefully, his family is able to find some closure following legal action.

Privacy Investigation Unfolds Regarding Credit and Debit Card Receipts

There are countless people across the country who use debit and credit cards every day. The added security provided by using debit and credit cards when compared to cash has given rise to a large industry; however, you may not realize that your personal information could be stored on these receipts. Based on the information on your credit and debit card receipts, you could be owed money.

Federal Laws Are in Place

There are federal laws that protect your private information from disclosure on credit and debit card receipts. This is called the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA), which indicates that businesses and companies can only print the last five digits of a card number on any given receipt. Furthermore, the expiration date cannot be printed. If the vendor prints more than this information, this could be a violation of FACTA, and it may entitle consumers to legal action.

Qualifying for Legal Action

Even though many people only look at their receipts for the total of the sale, it is important to look at the credit card information as well. If more than five digits of the credit card are printed (even if non-sequentially) or any part of the expiration date is printed, then you could be entitled to legal action. Some individuals might even be entitled to $1,000.

Furthermore, some individuals might even be able to serve as lead plaintiffs in a class-action lawsuit. In this case, the settlement amount might be even higher.

An Overview of FACTA

FACTA was passed back in 2003 as a way to protect people from the dangers of identity theft. Taking someone’s credit card number is one of the easiest ways to do exactly that. This sensitive information could even be accessed by criminals using a phishing attack against a sensitive database. FACTA seeks to curtail this activity. Sadly, some vendors still print too many digits, placing their customers at risk of identity theft.

Common Violations

There are a few common violations of FACTA printed on receipts. Sometimes, the expiration date is printed without slashes or breaks; however, if the expiration date is printed in any format, this is a violation. Furthermore, some receipts print more than five digits of the card number. They might not be sequential; however, this is still a violation. Anyone who receipt features one of these common violations should consider taking legal action.

Personal Injury Lawsuits Have Lawyers Earning 160 Million From Opioid Settlements

Fifteen opioid settlements have earned lawyers contingency fees amounting to nearly $160 million in both Oklahoma and two Ohio counties. The news comes after a law review blog made known the details of the settlements, coupled with government officials’ emails.
Amid the coronavirus pandemic, a dozen law firms received contingency fees over their lawsuit contracts. Still, the even higher expected amount was slashed by the federal judge overseeing the Street Case. This agreement was devised to release five major global drug distributors from the more than 2,000 consumer lawsuits that face them, both in state and federal courts.
Big pharma held accountable for the opioid pandemic gripping America
The drug manufacturers include Cardinal Health, McKesson Corporation, Johnson & Johnson, AmerisourceBergen, and Israel based Teva, a maker of generic medication.
Several plaintiffs were represented against the Ohio counties and Oklahoma drug distributors, with the ruling setting a milestone for ongoing opioid-related litigation across the country. The distributors targeted are not as prominent as more significant corporate players that have misled consumers with marketing gimmicks, which fueled the opioid epidemic. Evidence, however, points to their being key actors of evading regulation or assisting drug manufactories and outlets in circumventing opioid painkillers’ order limits.
The lawyers for the opioid victims argued that these distributors had flaunted state and federal laws by conspiring to desist from monitoring or reporting manufacturers or pharmacies. Distributors were portrayed as not only turning a blind eye to the extraordinary number of opioid orders but also motivating their sales teams to place more volumes on the market.
The utter disregard for public health and safety was decried by one of the attorneys as ‘jamming open the floodgates of death on an unsuspecting American public.’ No comment was forthcoming from drug companies, who had reiterated that theirs was to deliver medication approved by the FDA, and that doctors prescribed these drugs to their patients.
What this landmark ruling means for drug industry stakeholders
The deal saw the pharmaceutical distributors alongside manufacturer Teva pay a combination of cash payouts and addict treatment center donations. With over 400,000 casualties reported in the US opioid epidemic, drug market stakeholders can be brought to the stand following this $160 million landmark settlement.
While the two Ohio county settlements were being read, corporate lawyers for the defendants, other drug distribution companies, and pharmaceutical players were already pursuing another global deal. This would see them pay or donate over $48 billion to opioid treatments.