(360) 733-3773 Bellingham, WA

SHEPARD_ALLEN2

King County Drops Suit Against Fossil Fuel Giants Chevron, Exxon, BP and Others

Posted by David Brown 
· October 19, 2021 

A Washington state court lawsuit accusing five large oil companies of influencing climate change has been dropped. King County, home to Seattle, accused fossil fuel companies, including Exxon Mobil, Chevron and BP Plc of contributing to current climate conditions like global warming.

A recent filing stated the county is voluntarily abandoning the suit. In the lawsuit, the county alleged the companies were a public nuisance and committed trespassing in their production and marketing of fossil fuels.

Over the last four years, two dozen state and municipal plaintiffs filed lawsuits similar to this one. King County is the first one to end its lawsuit. The case asked for hundreds of millions in damages caused by the manufacturing and marketing of fossil fuel.

King County lawyer Matthew Pawa did not comment, and King County did not respond to requests for comment.

The county wanted the companies to provide funding for planned spending to protect residents from rising sea levels, increased flooding and other projected changes in the climate caused by global warming.

Casey Norton, an Exxon spokesperson, said lawsuits like this don’t advance meaningful measures to reduce climate change and waste millions of taxpayer dollars. Paul, Weiss, Rifkind Wharton and Garrison represent Exxon.

There has been no comment from Chevron or BP. Theodore Boutrous of Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher is one of Chevron’s lawyers. Arnold and Porter Kaye Scholer represent BP in this matter.

Patrick Parenteau of Vermont Law School and Dan Farber of the California Berkeley School of Law — both environmental law experts — expressed surprise that the case ended so suddenly. However, Farber believes the county’s retreat from the suit may be a developing legal tactic.

Farber stated King County could be regearing its lawsuit to follow other states and municipalities that have focused their lawsuits on promotional claims. “I think it will give King County a stronger case,” Farber said.

Massachusetts, Vermont and other state attorneys’ generals filed lawsuits recently stating consumers are being deceived by fossil fuel companies about the harm their products cause. Some legal experts think these lawsuits have a better chance at success since the claims accuse companies of violating state law instead of the nuisance claim filed by King County.

 

Categories : News
Tags : ,

Some Workers in Washington State Are Fighting Vaccine Mandates

Posted by David Brown 
· October 14, 2021 

A proclamation signed by Governor Jay Inslee mandates that broad swaths of workers must be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by October 18th in order to keep their jobs. The proclamation includes most long-term care and health providers, and all K-12 education, childcare, college and state employees. The governor states that his authority lies within his February 2020 declared state of emergency due to COVID-19. According to the governor, he then has broad authority under that state of emergency to protect the health and safety of those he governs.

Some workers who are in danger of losing their job are fighting back. They have filed a lawsuit stating that the governor has overstepped his authority, and that he cannot force people to get vaccinated as a condition of employment. Among other claims, the lawyers for the state workers who signed on to the action say that the vaccine mandate for workers violates the 14th amendment. Among other things, that amendment says that the state can’t make and enforce laws that unduly affect people’s rights as citizens. To these workers, a vaccine mandate does just that.

The lawsuit also challenges the lack of religious and medical exemptions built into the governor’s proclamation, and a subsequent letter sent by the Spokane Fire Chief that the city would not make such exemptions. According to a letter sent to employers, this decision was based on the city’s ability to protect the health and safety of others who work with the unvaccinated.

In total, the lawsuit gives eleven reasons why the mandate is unlawful. It seeks monetary damages for the violation of federal law they see through the mandate, continued employment without vaccination, and repayment for attorney and court costs. The lawsuit is funded by a non-profit organization called the Washington Citizens for Liberty. It names not only the governor, but other government officials such as the Secretaries of the Departments of Transportation and Social and Health Services.

While the lawsuit is still in its early stages, it is one of many filed by workers across the country who believe that governors overstep their bounds when they put vaccine employment mandates in place.

Categories : News
Tags : , ,

Does Healthcare Technology Influence Medical Malpractice?

Posted by David Brown 
· October 12, 2021 

Nowadays, medical technology is fundamental to healthcare policies due to its impact on accessibility, cost, and quality. However, technology is also prompting medical malpractice. Although technological advances enhance medical treatment and diagnosis, technical hitches, incompetence in its applications, and malfunctions can lead to severe problems.

According to Forbes, about 400,000 people die annually as a result of preventable medical errors, including preventable Hospital Acquired Infections. Many of these errors are linked to technology. In the United States, over 100,000 people are killed or injured due to medical errors annually, in reference to Jacoby & Meyers, personal injury attorneys. These common medical errors include birth injuries, prescription dosage errors, surgical errors, diagnosis failure, anesthesia errors, treatment delays, and emergency room negligence.

Benefits of Medical Technology

Healthcare providers and patients positively view medical technology due to its contribution to improved understanding of health conditions, diagnosis, and treatment. Besides, technology has also improved access to health services, especially in rural areas.

The simplification of procedures by healthcare technology has also enhanced productivity and more focused healthcare. Additionally, technology has also enhanced the reduction of human error, particularly in recordkeeping and filling, as this can cause devastating concerns.

Risks of Medical Technology

Despite the benefits offered by medical technology, there are some risks linked to it. As healthcare providers learn to use and apply new medical tech systems, they may make errors endangering patients. Although tech advances may restrain some human error areas, people are also likely to make mistakes. Besides, due to the mechanical nature of technology, malfunction is also another risk posed by the use of technology. This can place the life of a patient in danger or cause severe damage.

Impact of Technology on Medical Malpractice

Although several professionals claim tech advances help minimize medical malpractice incidences, since human error is not common when applying electronic methods, technology can also help a medical malpractice case. The use of electronic records facilitates the availability of documentation that can prove an error. As opposed to the past, where attorneys relayed in in-office or recalled conversations, nowadays, lawyers can use patient portals, emails, electronic records, and other forms of technology in court.

Technology has greatly influenced how people live. However, the application of technology can create some risks, especially if not properly managed or controlled.

Categories : News
Tags : ,

Greyhound Settles Lawsuit with Washington state for $2.2 Million

Posted by David Brown 
· October 7, 2021 

Greyhound Lines Inc reached a $2.2 million settlement with the State of Washington as a result of a lawsuit filed by State of Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson. The basis for the lawsuit was the policy of Greyhound to allow the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents to conduct warrantless immigration sweeps on Greyhound buses.

The lawsuit, filed April 13, 2020 in Spokane County Superior Court, cited the “unfair, deceptive, and discriminatory practice of regularly allowing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents to board Greyhound buses” on its non-public property at the Spokane Intermodal Center. The suit alleged that the purpose of CBP boarding the buses was to perform suspicionless and warrantless immigration sweeps of Greyhound bus passengers. The suit further alleged that the immigration sweeps violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination, along with the Consumer Protection Act.

The state attorney general’s office further alleged that Greyhound refused to implement changes and continually failed to notify Greyhound passengers about the possibility of immigration sweeps. The warrantless sweeps continued even after Greyhound acknowledged in 2018 that they resulted in harm to its passengers.

The settlement, announced September 28, 2021, will go towards recouping legal fees, and for restitution to passengers that were arrested, detained, or deported because of the immigration sweeps. Greyhound agreed to other terms, which include:

  • Issuing a public statement in both English and Spanish that the company does not support CBP agents boarding its buses without a warrant
  • Placing stickers at or near the front door of buses indicating that Greyhound does not consent to immigration officers boarding its buses without reasonable suspicion or a warrant
  • Providing placards for Greyhound drivers to give to immigration agents that state that the company does not consent to immigration officers boarding buses to perform warrantless or suspicionless searches
  • Implementing a complaint procedure for passengers that want to complain about the presence of CBP agents on buses or at Greyhound bus stations

Judge Maryann C. Moreno previously denied a request by Greyhound to dismiss the lawsuit in March 2021. The judge rejected the argument that Greyhound did not have a choice but to allow the immigration agents to board their buses and to conduct the immigration sweeps. The trial was set to begin the day before the announcement of the settlement.

Categories : News
Tags :

Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Energy Companies in the Wake of Huntington Beach Oil Spill

Posted by David Brown 
· October 5, 2021 

The environment has been a significant area of focus during the past few years, and it was devastating to hear that a massive oil spill took place off the coast of Huntington Beach, California. Unfortunately, there are some people who believe that some of the damage to the wildlife in the area, including the fish and bird populations, could be permanent. Now, it is time for the oil companies who are responsible for this spill to take time to be held accountable for their actions.

Recently, a federal lawsuit was filed in the Central District of California Western Division. The lawsuit claims that the companies in charge of operating the rig and associated pipeline caused direct harm to the ecosystem, wildlife, and people who live there. The lawsuit alleges that these companies should have taken more actions to prevent oil from spilling from the platform, which is located approximately 4.5 miles from shore.

The lawsuit also alleges that the defendants did not provide the public with adequate notice of the hazard and the potential impacts of the oil spill. Deceased animals have been washing up on the beach covered in oil. The shorelines of the impacted area have suffered a significant amount of environmental damage. Unfortunately, there are some experts who believe the damage to the environment could be irreversible.

The affected area of the oil spill stretches from Newport Beach to Huntington Beach. The defendants include Beta Operating Company, Amplify Energy Corporation, and numerous other Affiliates. Sadly, as many as 144,000 gallons of oil leaked into the Pacific Ocean after a pipe burst. This led to a massive oil chain standing close to six nautical miles off the coast of Huntington Beach. As numerous beaches were closed to the public, the disaster continued to get worse. Plants and animals were irreparably damaged, and countless people turned out to volunteer. It will be interesting to track a lawsuit as it goes through the legal system. Even though the oil companies should be expected to mount a vigorous defense, the impacts on the environment are not in dispute. It will take a long time to clean this mess up, and those who are responsible for the disaster should have a hand in doing so.

Categories : News
Tags : , ,

Legal Cannabis in Illegal Markets: A Lawsuit Claims This Is Disrupting the Industry

Posted by David Brown 
· September 28, 2021 

While there has been a significant push to legalize cannabis across the country, some states lag behind the relaxed laws of California. Even though it is possible to buy some of the leading brands of marijuana off the shelves of CA, such as Bordeaux cannabis, the same cannot be said of other states, such as New York. Therefore, how is it possible that Bordeaux cannabis can be found on the shelves of speakeasies across the country?

The answer is that people are still breaking the law. While California supposedly has a strict system, people are still diverting millions of pounds of cannabis grown legally in California to markets across the country, including those in New York. Now, a recent lawsuit alleges that this is not only happening but that the authorities do not care. The lawsuit alleges that because the authorities are not taking this issue seriously, they are threatening the security of the entire experiment of marijuana legalization.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit allege that criminals are raking in massive profits as people pay a premium for marijuana in areas outside of California. This means that legitimate cannabis businesses in California are suffering. The lawsuit also says that conversations happen constantly among industry professionals, but nobody has spoken up in a court of law until then. It appears to be the worst-kept secret in the industry, and nobody in a position of power appears to be doing anything about it.

Of note, the lawsuit is not seeking any monetary damages. Instead, the lawsuit seeks to force authorities in the state to regulate this issue for the first time. The lawsuit is asking the court to compel the state to make a bigger effort to shut down the alleged illegal distribution network of cannabis across the country.

Specifically, the lawsuit wants authorities to target straw man operations, which are “burner” distributors, who are responsible for moving cannabis from legal markets to illegal markets. The lawsuit says that this should not be happening, but that it is, and that the authorities are not making a good-faith effort to stop it. It will be interesting to see how the lawsuit plays out in court and what its impact might be on the cannabis industry.

Categories : News
Tags : , ,

Lawsuit Filed Targeting Misleading Food Practices Among Food Giants

Posted by David Brown 
· September 23, 2021 

During the past few years, there has been a massive push for sustainable, ethical farming practices among meat and dairy providers. Even though a lot of packages contain flashy labels, a recent lawsuit alleges that these labels might not be what they seem. Recently, a lawsuit was filed by advocacy groups seeking to curb deceptive marketing practices. According to the lawsuit; the plaintiffs allege that these companies are dishonestly profiting off of a growing interest in eating environmentally-friendly, sustainably-sourced food without actually following these practices. The lawsuit alleges that some of the biggest food giants in the world have not made any meaningful changes to their production or farming practices.

Class-action lawsuits filed against food and beverage companies have been on the rise, with record numbers being filed last year. With the mounting wave of legal activism, the frustration among consumers is clearly growing. Advocates have worked hard to find other ways to apply pressure to food giants, but nothing seems to be working. Now, they are taking them to court instead. While advocates have pushed federal regulators to define what is meant by terms such as “all natural” and “healthy,” this has not happened. As a result, the lawsuit alleges that these food companies have been exploiting the gap.

The lawsuit is targeting Cargill and Tyson, among others. The lawsuit states that Cargill is producing its turkeys in ways that place farmers in debt while the farmers have no say in the way the turkeys are raised, placing them in harm’s way. Furthermore, Tyson produces chickens in a crowded shed, contaminating them with pathogens resistant to antibiotics before cleaning them with chemical disinfectants. The lawsuit further alleges that many of the companies use marketing that is misleading or exaggerated, trying to convince buyers that the companies align with the values on the labels, but the lawsuit claims that these companies continue to mistreat countless animals.

The plaintiffs do not believe companies should be allowed to profit off of misleading marketing practices, as it creates an unfair playing field and is dishonest to shoppers. While it is unclear what will happen in the legal case, the lawsuit has drawn more attention to an important issue in the industry.

Categories : News
Tags :

Lawsuit Filed Against Apple Over Keyboard for Apple Watch

Posted by David Brown 
· September 21, 2021 
Apple has had a number of legal issues during the past few years. Now, they are facing another lawsuit regarding a keyboard that works with the Apple Watch. Even though people have fallen in love with the app, the keyboard app was removed from the App Store. While the keyboard was so popular that many people stated the tech mammoth should buy the keyboard from the developer, Apple unexpectedly pulled the keyboard from the App Store, saying it was against the rules of the App Store.

Shortly thereafter, Apple went on to reveal its own swipe keyboard in association with the new Apple Watch Series 7. Users everywhere realized that the “new” Apple keyboard simply copied the one the developer had put on the App Store, which was later removed.

It should come as no surprise that the developer filed a lawsuit against Apple. This specific developer is far from the first. Apple has a reputation for looking at the applications available on the app store. Then, they copy the ideas and integrate them into their operating systems. The tech giant does this because it allows them to get around the cost of paying the developers for their ideas. It has even earned its own name, called “Sherlocking.”

This lawsuit claims that Apple continually rejected and held up his keyboard for months all while trying to force him to sell the keyboard to them for a cheap price. The lawsuit also alleges that Apple singled out his keyboard specifically, all while letting others go through on the App Store. Even though the company says that it simply changed its mind regarding the keyboard, it will be interesting to see if this argument holds up in court. The plaintiff in a lawsuit alleges that it took more than a year of resubmissions and appeals in order for his keyboard to return to the store. When he saw that a replica of his keyboard was available with the new Apple Watch, he decided that enough was enough.

It will be interesting to see if this lawsuit sets a precedent regarding developers and Apple. Can large corporations copy the ideas of their developers? Do developers have the right to have their apps on the App Store without being harassed by Apple? Many are interested in what the courts decide.

Categories : News
Tags :

Lawsuit Claims Apple, Google, and Amazon Are Spies

Posted by David Brown 
· September 16, 2021 

We all love the convenience that Big Tech firms afford us in the 21st century, but does it mean we involuntarily sacrifice our privacy by buying into these services? The answer might very well be yes, according to a class-action lawsuit that will make you think twice about using your favorite voice assistant Siri. Apple, the company behind the Siri persona, stands accused of violating the California privacy law and the federal Wiretap Act.

Not only that but there are also lawsuits of a similar nature against Google and Amazon. The common denominator seems to be that these giant tech companies are illegally recording conversations to extract information sold to advertisers. These allegations come when voice assistant features and smart speakers are becoming more popular by the day. Still, it’s only a lawsuit, and the claims are only valid if Big Tech is proven guilty. So, that means you have nothing to worry about, right?

It never hurts to be cautious around voice assistant technology

As mentioned, Apple, Google, and Amazon are all facing similar lawsuits, and the plaintiffs claim they are listening in on your private discussions. All three companies have voice assistant features. Coincidence? Right now, there’s no way to know for sure. Google insists they don’t retain audio recordings. Amazon says they manually review a tiny portion of Alexa requests with the consent of users only to improve user experience and not to sell to third parties.

But because the concern has already been raised, there’s no harm in exercising some due diligence. It’s best to ensure your privacy is protected in the worst-case scenario.

For starters, it’s important to avoid accidentally activating your voice assistant. By way of example, simply saying “Alexa” will activate this feature if you have an Amazon smart device.

“Okay, Google” and “Hi Siri” will do the trick for Google and Apple smart devices, respectively.

The other thing is to make sure all your privacy settings don’t have any loopholes. You don’t want your recordings to be saved? Here’s how you do it:

Alexa

  • Open the Alexa app
  • Click the privacy menu
  • Go to Manage your Alexa data
  • Click the “Choose how long to save recordings option.”
  • Choose “Don’t save recordings.”

Google

  • Go to your Google Account
  • Click on Data and Privacy
  • Click on Web & App Activity
  • Uncheck the box that’s next to “include audio recordings.”
  • Also, uncheck the default settings

Apple

According to Apple, they will only retain your recordings if you opt-in by changing your settings.

No doubt, more information will be revealed as the progress of the lawsuits. For now, it’s up to users to do what they can to protect their privacy.

Categories : News
Tags : , ,

More Americans Believe That Personal Injury Attorneys Will Help You Get More Compensation

Posted by David Brown 
· September 14, 2021 

According to a survey conducted by Patino Law Firm of McAllen and San Antonio, Texas, a significant number of Americans believe that a personal injury lawyer can help them get more money after an accident. This view was further echoed by a report by Google Surveys, with 42.7% of respondents stating that a personal injury attorney is crucial to getting more compensation in the aftermath of an injury or property damage.

Personal injury law encompasses a wide area of expertise, with a few areas covered being slips and trips in public places and automobile accidents. Numerous Texas personal injury attorneys are also tasked with tackling oilfield accidents, a factor likely linked to the region’s high number of oil wells.

With the use of a contingency fee plan, it is no wonder that most clients prefer hiring a personal injury lawyer to tackle their case, given that payment only happens when the lawyer wins the settlement. The survey conducted in Texas and neighboring southern states shows that a whopping 40.9% of respondents are confident that they would hire a lawyer. Only 12.5% of respondents state that they would consider handling their own case, with the remainder 46.6% being indecisive about whether or not they would consider getting a lawyer. In hindsight, the latter group is likely not to have found themselves in any situation requiring the services of a lawyer, hence the hesitance to get one.

With insurance companies often making quick settlements in the hope that the injured parties will accept any offer to allow them to get back to their lives, personal injury lawyers are the solution to helping such parties get better compensation. When asked if they would fight for a better deal or settle for a quick offer, 17.3% of respondents said they would likely take the second option, with 19.8% stating they would fight to get more. In contrast, 8.4% would be willing to take any offer put forward even if it was low, with 54.5% stating they had no opinion on the matter.

When the same respondents were asked to give their view of personal injury attorneys, 21% believed that the attorneys were only after the money, while 59.9% did not have an opinion. Only 15.3% said that the attorneys represented their victims to help them get justice and 3.8% believed that the services of a personal injury attorney were essential after an accident.

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