WebProNews

Tag: Lawsuit

  • Katherine Heigl Drops Lawsuit Against Duane Reade

    Katherine Heigl decided to drop her lawsuit against the drugstore chain Duane Reade. Heigl had filed the lawsuit because Duane Read had used a photo of her in their advertisements without asking her.

    The photo showed Heigl exiting a Duane Reade pharmacy and was allegedly taken by paparazzi without Heigl’s knowledge or consent.

    The drugstore had been using the photo in advertisements online and Heigl accused them of using her image to make money and of violating the false advertising provision of the Lanham Act as well as New York civil rights statutes protecting use of likenesses for purpose of trade.

    Heigl and the drugstore chain came to an agreement this week and Heigl’s attorney turned in the paperwork to dismiss the lawsuit on Tuesday.

    Heigl’s attorney released a statement about the dismissal saying,

    “Katherine Heigl and Duane Reade have worked out a mutually beneficial agreement. Ms. Heigl has voluntarily dismissed her lawsuit, and Duane Reade has made a contribution to benefit the Jason Debus Heigl Foundation. The parties have agreed to keep the terms of the agreement confidential.”

    The Jason Debus Heigl Foundation was created by Katherine in memory of her brother, who was killed in a car accident in 1986. The charity promotes animal welfare.

    The terms of the agreement or the amount of money that was donated by the drugstore chain were not revealed and the dismissal comes with prejudice, meaning that Heigl can’t later sue against the drugstore chain again, if they ever try to use her photos without her consent.

    Do you think the lawsuit was ridiculous in the first place or was Heigl right to sue the store?

  • Arwa Damon and CNN Sued for Anchor’s Biting Attack

    We’ve all been there before – You’re at a party after a long, hard week at work and it’s finally time to let loose. You have a beer or two, and then another, and another… Until you wake up the next morning and have no clue what happened during the past 48 hours. And, because we’ve all been there, no one judges those people when that state hits them. However, CNN anchor Arwa Damon seems to have taken the post-work stress-relief binger a bit(e) too far.

    On Monday, TMZ broke the news that CNN and Damon were being sued by two EMTs due to her actions at the US Embassy in Baghdad in July. After having one (or several) too many drinks, Damon became unruly and violent. Authorities were called to assist with the situation, and things only went downhill from there.

    While trying to assist Damon, EMTs Charles Simons and Tracy Lamar claim to have been bitten by a “seriously intoxicated” and violent Damon. Instead of apologizing for her actions or attempting to rectify the situation, Damon then allegedly threatened the paramedics, stating that she “was a major reporter for CNN.”

    On Monday, CNN stated that “We are not aware of the alleged lawsuit and therefore have no comment.” Today, however, a CNN representative stated, “We are aware of the lawsuit and are looking into it.”

    The news has to come as a shock to CNN, who considers Damon one of their best reporters. Damon has been employed at CNN since 2006, during which time she has covered many stories in the Middle East. Earlier this year, Damon was awarded the Courage in Journalism Award by the International Women’s Media Foundation. The foundation stated that “Regardless of the constant shelling and sniper fire during her last trip to Homs, Arwa Damon’s persistence, strength and focus on bringing forth what needs to be known in order to help document history, has her standing tall amidst the rubble.”

    While Damon nor CNN have admitted guilt yet, an apology emailed by Damon to the embassy staff seems to be an admission of guilt:

    It’s been an extremely stressful time, I was exhausted, I had not had proper food all day and clearly miscalculated how my body would handle the alcohol consumed … Needless to say, I am utterly mortified and take full responsibility for my actions, which are inexcusable.

    I am being filled in on the details of my behavior. I am beyond embarrassed. My actions and words were entirely out of my character, and I hope that everyone can at some point forgive me.

    So once again, I am apologizing and extending my thanks to all that were involved in ensuring that I am, thankfully, in the end, taken care of and physically at least OK. Everyone was extremely professional and courteous in the face of my unjustified behavior.

    Both paramedics are seeking $1 million in punitive damages.

    Image via YouTube

  • Jesse Ventura Wins Lawsuit Against Chris Kyle Estate

    Jesse Ventura has won his lawsuit against the estate of Chris Kyle. Ventura sued Kyle back in 2012 for defamation and alleged that Kyle had based a character in his autobiography on him.

    Chris Kyle wrote a book called American Sniper: The Autobiography of the Most Lethal Sniper in U.S. Military History. In the book he described many events from his life. One of the events describes an altercation between Kyle and an unnamed man in a bar. The books says that the man made a comment about the Navy Seals deserving to lose a few men during the war. The book goes on to say that Kyle punched the man.

    Although Kyle did not name Ventura as the man he had punched in the bar, Ventura claims that Kyle was referring to him in the book.

    Ventura admitted to going to the same bar as Kyle and said that a lot of Navy Seals frequented the bar as well.

    He said that he did not make any comments about the Navy Seals deserving to lose a few men nor was he punched by Kyle or anyone else in the bar.

    Ventura had originally filed a lawsuit against Kyle, but Kyle was killed last year. Venture decided to continue the lawsuit against the estate of Kyle and his widow. Ventura has received a lot of criticism for his lawsuit, especially after deciding to pursue it after Kyle’s death.

    He claims that he would not have went through with the lawsuit if Kyle would have admitted that he had lied about the story before his death. Many people believe that one of Ventura’s reasons for filing the lawsuit was to get attention.

    Ventura claimed that the book caused his career to suffer and that he lost money and was no longer offered opportunities for his entertainment career as a result of the book.

    Ventura was awarded over $1.8 million in the lawsuit. Do you think he really came out a winner or did he hurt his career and reputation even more by going forward with a lawsuit against a widow?

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Kanye West Kills ‘Coinye’ Cryptocurrency

    Kanye West Kills ‘Coinye’ Cryptocurrency

    The creators of the cryptocurrency known as “Coinye” were officially shut down after receiving 84 court documents describing copyright violations from Kanye West’s legal team.

    Coinye, originally called “Coinye West”, a scrypt-based cryptocurrency that featured West’s face as its symbol, was set to be released on January 11. Though, on January 6, West’s lawyers sent the creators of Coinye West a cease and desist letter, citing trademark infringement, unfair competition, cyberpiracy and dilution.

    The developers changed the name of the currency to Coinye, and switched domain names. An addition of a fish tail to the mascot was included as a nod to a South Park episode that depicted West as being unable to understand why people were referring to him as being a “gay fish.”

    The Gay Fish song:

    Needless to say, West and his lawyers were not satisfied with the gay fish alteration, and the creators of Coinye jumped ship, and sold all of their Coinye holdings. Though, volunteers have continued to develop the coin, even though the original creators refer to them as being “morons trying to revive this coin.”

    At present, Coinyethecoin exists online, with a tagline reading, “That’s right bitches. Look who never died!!”

    West’s lawsuit named several defendants, many of whom never responded to any claims, which rendered them in the wrong by default. Named defendents Harry Wills and Richard McCord have reached a settlement with West.

    Wills, a 17-year-old U.K. high school student, commented, “The main reason I settled is because I get to have West’s lawyer, a United States district judge and Kanye West’s signature along with my signature on the legal document that removes me as a defendant, which I will print off and frame.”

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • 5-Hour Energy Drink Manufacturer Sued

    5-Hour Energy Drink Manufacturer Sued

    Michigan-based manufacturer Living Essentials and its parent company Innovation Ventures have been sued by three states over false advertising regarding the wildly popular 5-Hour Energy performance shots.

    The active ingredients in a 5-Hour Energy shot, which was invented by Indian-American billionaire Manoj Bhargava, are taurine, glucuronolactone, malic acid, N-Acetyl L-tyrosine, L-phenylalanine, caffeine and citicoline, The state of Oregon asserts that the only active ingredient in the shots is caffeine.

    The Oregon suit was filed in Multnomah County Circuit Court, and according to a statement released by Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson, similar suits were filed in Washington and Vermont. The lawsuits are requesting a permanent injunction prohibiting 5-Hour Energy’s allegedly deceptive marketing, and also civil penalties and restitution to consumers. Other states are expected to follow suit in the coming weeks.

    Living Essentials says that 5-Hour Energy is good for you:

    Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum said in a statement, “Plainly and simply, in Oregon you cannot promote a product as being effective if you don’t have sufficient evidence to back up your advertising claims.”

    The Oregon lawsuit also claims that consumers had been misled with claims that 5-Hour Energy had been recommended by doctors, and that it does not cause a caffeine crash, after the five hours are up.

    Some 5-Hour Energy Twitter intrigue:

    A representative for Living Essentials, which sells around nine million shots of 5-Hour Energy per day, likened the Oregon suit’s allegations as “grasping at straws” and “civil intimidation,” and said the makers of the drink would fight to defend themselves.

    “Hello my friend”:

    The lawsuits came about after an investigation launched in 2012 by 33 states. Oregon, Tennessee, Maryland and Vermont are so far the first states to have taken action against Living Essentials.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Dethroned Miss Delaware Files Lawsuit

    Dethroned Miss Delaware Files Lawsuit

    Former Miss Delaware Amanda Longacre is suing state pageant officials and the Miss America organization after being dethroned for being too old.

    Longacre turns 25 in October, and pageant rules state that contestants must be between the ages of 17 and 24. Apparently, the fine print reads somewhere that contestants have to still be 24 by the end of the year. Due to this technicality, Longacre was stripped of her crown, and the Miss Delaware title went to her runner up, Brittany Lewis.

    In a lawsuit filed Tuesday in Delaware’s Court of Chancery, Longacre is seeking to be reinstated as Miss Delaware and to be allowed to compete in the Miss America pageant. The 24-year-old is also seeking $500,000 in damages for herself and $2.5 million for other contestants, who she believes were recruited to compete in pageants before being told they were too old. Longacre was originally cleared by pageant officials to compete.

    Longacre also seeks an official pass to be able to compete for the Miss America title in September, restoration of her titles as Miss Pike Creek and Miss Delaware, and the full-term reign as Miss Delaware.

    The lawsuit, which names others who were disqualified after competing, asserts that pageant organizations knowingly recruit ineligible contestants to augment dwindling participation, take advantage of them for fundraising and appearances, and then disqualify them.

    The Miss America 2015 pageant runs from September 9-14 in Atlantic City, New Jersey, and will be broadcast live on ABC.

    Image via Youtube

  • Scarlett Johansson No Sex Object, Wins Lawsuit

    Scarlett Johansson has won a lawsuit against an author whose book featured a character bearing a very similar likeness to the actress. She filed suit against author Gregoire Delacourt for making “fraudulent use of her name, fame and image” in his book titled La premiere chose qu’on regarde (The First Thing We Look At). The book features a character described as Scarlett Johansson’s ‘exact double.’ That character is treated like a sex object throughout the book.

    Delacourt, however, claims he used Johansson’s likeness on the written page as a means of complimenting the Avengers actress.

    “It was meant as the highest praise. She is an archetypal beauty of our times, very human with a touching fragility. She is a wonderful, iconic actress. I was hoping that she might send me flowers because this book is, in a way, a declaration of love. If I had known she was going to kick up such a racket, I would have picked another actress,” he said.

    “I wrote a work of fiction. My character is not Scarlett Johansson,” the author said in an interview with a French newspaper. “I’m not sure she’s even read the book. It’s not been translated.”

    And speaking of translated, Scarlett Johansson wanted to make sure the work is never translated into any other languages or adapted for film use, and she sought an injunction that would hopefully prevent any of these things from happening. The court threw it out, however.

    Johansson will soon be back on the big screen in a film called Lucy, in which she plays a ‘merciless warrior.’ She decides to fight back against some people who have taken extreme advantage of her.

    Gregoire Delacourt’s publisher claims that since the lawsuit is now settled the novel could in fact be published again–in English this time.

    Scarlett Johansson only received 2,500 euros–the equivalent of 3,400 U.S. dollars in the suit. She sought the equivalent of $70,000. Do you think she deserved more respect from the French courts than this paltry award? Do you think the novel will eventually wind up published in English? That will no doubt open up a whole new lawsuit from which Johansson will hopefully get more money and stop the author who has unfairly portrayed her as a sex object.

    Scarlett Johansson is sexy, but definitely no object in the upcoming Lucy. This may be one of her most enthralling roles to date.

    Image via YouTube

  • George Zimmerman Lawsuit Tossed Out

    George Zimmerman Lawsuit Tossed Out

    George Zimmerman, the man who pursued and fatally shot Trayvon Martin, has been trying to get a payday from NBC. Zimmerman sued NBC for the way the network edited the text of his 911 call the night he encountered Travon Martin.

    Zimmerman alleged that NBC’s selective editing of the call made him look like a racist in the eyes of the nation, and thus he accused them of defamation of character.

    But a judge has dismissed Zimmerman’s lawsuit, saying that Zimmerman could not prove that NBC’s actions were with any “malicious intent”.

    The standard of “malicious intent” is a necessary hurdle in order to make a defamation of character accusation stick.


    The lawsuit revolved around the portion of Zimmerman’s 911 call on that fateful night where, according to NBC’s original transcription and editing, Zimmerman was heard to say:

    “This guy looks like he’s up to no good … He looks black.”

    His words caused a public uproar, and the impression of him that he was a racist took root. But, upon more complete examination, the 911 call actually went like this:

    Zimmerman: We’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood and there’s a real suspicious guy. It’s Retreat View Circle. The best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle. This guy looks like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around looking about.

    911 dispatcher: OK, is he White, Black, or Hispanic?

    Zimmerman: He looks black.

    Seeing the entire exchange puts the statement in a very different light. And Zimmerman may indeed have a point that it defamed his character in that sense. But being able to prove that NBC acted with malicious intent is another thing altogether. This is particularly difficult since NBC issued a retraction and apology about the incident, saying:

    A March 21 story about the Trayvon Martin shooting in Sanford, Fla., initially truncated a transcription of George Zimmerman’s conversation with a police dispatcher. The truncated quote made it seem that Zimmerman, acting as a neighborhood watch, brought up the race of the Miami teenager he was following in his neighborhood. Martin was later shot during a confrontation with Zimmerman. During the conversation, the police dispatcher asked Zimmerman specifically about the teen’s race and he answered.

    The TODAY show broadcast truncated a portion of George Zimmerman’s conversation with a police dispatcher, and that truncated interview appeared on TODAY.com and msnbc.com. The video was removed from the site on March 30, as NBC News launched an internal investigation. On April 3, NBC News issued this statement: “During our investigation it became evident that there was an error made in the production process that we deeply regret. We will be taking the necessary steps to prevent this from happening in the future and apologize to our viewers.”

    Zimmerman owes his attorneys $2.5 Million in fees for his criminal trial. Any damages he would have collected from the NBC lawsuit would have helped cover his outstanding bill.

    Even without collecting money, perhaps Zimmerman hopes that the truth about his words that night will be seen by more people.

    Image via YouTube

  • Scotty McCreery Owes Former Manager $239,329

    A Nashville jury has ordered that Scotty McCreery pay his former manager $239,329 to compensate for five months of back pay.

    The decision came on Wednesday, June 18 after Todd Cassetty filed a lawsuit against the former American Idol.

    According to The Tennessean, McCreery and Cassetty joined forces in 2012 after Scotty parted ways with 19 Entertainment, the company who managed him following his American Idol win. However, Scotty and Todd decided to end their professional relationship in early 2013.

    According to Todd, who was represented by Nashville attorneys Stephen Zralek and Ed Yarbrough, Scotty was to pay him the standard pay of 15 percent of his gross income for the time that he served as his manager.

    Scotty’s mother Judy McCreery controls most of her son’s finances, and was named a defendant in the case. Scotty and Todd never had a written agreement, but according to emails from Scotty, he had told Todd that he would pay him the 15 percent. Scotty later tried to offer Todd 2 percent after the lawsuit was filed, but Todd did not feel this was a fair amount.

    In July 2013, Scotty released a statement claiming that he had offered to pay Todd more than once. “There is no truth to these allegations. I have offered to pay Todd more than once, but he wanted an unreasonable amount for only five months of work,” the statement read. “Anyone who knows me knows how I conduct myself, so I am not worried they will believe any of this. This is just an attempt to embarrass me and my family. The facts will come out when we have our day in court.”

    Following the court’s ruling, McCreery issued another statement. “I am very pleased with the management fee ruling of only $239,000, which was less than half of the $570,000 Mr. Cassetty requested,” he said. “It was always my intention to pay Mr. Cassetty and indeed had offered to pay him more than once. His request, however, for over half a million dollars was too much for a few months of work.

    “While it has been difficult to risk having my reputation challenged, I always believed that the truth would prevail, and it has,” Scotty added. “I have a management team, including a professional business manager, in Nashville advising me. Now I am happy to put this behind me and focus on my music. As always, I am thankful to my fans for all of their support.”

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Evan Rachel Wood Sued $30M For Bailing On Film

    Evan Rachel Wood is now looking at a $30M lawsuit for reportedly “bailing” on filming of a Ten Things I Hate About You sequel, titled Ten Things I Hate About Life.

    The lawsuit, filed on Thursday in the LA Superior Court by 10 Films LLC, claims that Wood “seemingly changed her mind about appearing in the film, ultimately refusing without any legal justification to fulfill her contractual obligations and instead opting to walk out on the project.”

    10 Films Llc claims that Wood had already received her $300,000 advance for the full filming of the project. The film company claims that during a pause in filming in February 2013, Wood said she would not be able to continue filming for “personal reasons.” The $30 million requested in the lawsuit covers investments, financing, lost profits, and attorney fees.

    However, representatives for Wood are calling the $30 million suit “preposterous:” “The lawsuit is simply a bullying tactic from financially troubled producers. The production shut down when the producers ran out of money. The producers could not get their act together, nor did they pay Evan money that was owed,” a statement from Wood’s representatives claim. “The producers, not Evan, have breached contract,” they say. Below is a semi-trailer for the now defunct film:

    Evan did however take “personal time” off during the summer of 2013, welcoming her son with now recent ex-husband Jamie Bell. Perhaps Evan’s personal issues conflicted with the filming schedule, as she announced a separation from her husband nine months after giving birth. In an official statement the pair announced: “They both love and respect one another and will of course remain committed to co-parenting their son. This is a mutual decision and the two remain close friends.”

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Gregg Allman Named A Defendent In Death Lawsuit

    Gregg Allman is one of 10 defendents in a lawsuit brought by the parents of a camera assistant that was killed during filming of the biopic Midnight Rider, which is about the Allman Brothers Band founder himself.

    27-year-old Sarah Jones was killed and 6 others were injured when a freight train unexpectedly crossed a bridge that they were filming on over the Altamaha River in southeast Georgia.

    Others named in the suit include eight corporations including CSX Transportation, which owns the railway tracks where the crash occurred, and Rayonier Performance Fibres, a subsidiary of forest-products manufacturer Rayonier that owns the land surrounding the crash site for their individual responsibilities in the the crash that cut short the life of Sarah Jones.

    Her parents are devastated to say the least and want answers concerning what went down and how the film crew ended up on the bridge in the first place.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCBpldjtJB8

    According to their lawsuit against the above-named defendents, they suspect that those in charge ‘selected an unreasonably dangerous site for the filming location; failed to secure approval for filming from CSX; concealed their lack of approval from CSX from the cast and crew … and otherwise failed to take measures to protect the safety of the Midnight Rider cast and crew.’

    The suit also stated that ‘despite the fact that multiple CSX trains passed the Midnight Rider cast and crew on February 20, with those individuals in view of the trains’ operators, no warning was given to the subsequent train that ultimately caused Sarah’s death.’

    Such an unfortunate incident. Filming has been delayed indefinitely and the fate of the project is unknown. William Hurt, who was set to play Gregg Allman, quickly released a statement saying that he would no longer be involved in the movie. No one else has yet pulled out, but after such a tragedy filming is sure to be highly disrupted at the least.

    Image Via Wikimedia Commons

  • Stairway To Heaven: Led Zeppelin Sued Over Song

    Regardless of whether or not you’re a fan of legendary rock band Led Zeppelin, there’s a good chance you’ve heard their classic song “Stairway to Heaven” at some point in your life.

    It may have been on the radio or someone attempting (and failing) to adequately perform the number while learning to play the guitar.

    The piece of music is so well known and associated with the British rockers that it seems unfathomable that anyone else could take credit for it.

    However, Led Zeppelin is being sued more than forty years after the release of “Stairway To Heaven” over allegedly stealing a portion of the music from a lesser known group.

    To some music fans, this copyright-infringement lawsuit is long overdue as some have been saying for years that the gentle melody that flows throughout the song is taken directly from “Taurus” by the California-based band Spirit.

    While the songs aren’t exactly the same, it’s hard not to argue that the melody for a portion of the song is not the EXACT same as what you hear in “Stairway to Heaven”. In fact it is because “Stairway” is so famous that it’s easy to hear it in Taurus’s song.

    Front man Randy California and bassist Mark Andes are both deceased, but their trusts have joined together to file the suit ahead of the re-release of the song.

    The two bands did cross paths during the late 1960s, at a point where Spirit had already started performing the instrumental tune. So it’s very possible that Jimmy Page and Robert Plant put words to someone else’s music and jazzed it up a bit before putting it on Led Zeppelin IV.

    Some music fans will let their bias cloud their judgement. After all, no one wants to think that a band they’ve admired for decades stole any of their hits from anybody.

    However, this isn’t the first time that Led Zeppelin has been accused of plagiarizing from other artists and not awarding credit or profits.

    Depending on how the courts rule, this could prove the first time they’re forced to do so.

    Image via YouTube

  • Taylor Swift Sued by Lucky 13 Clothing Company

    “Basically whenever a 13 comes up in my life, it’s a good thing.”

    Maybe not this time, Taylor.

    Country-pop diva Taylor Swift is being sued by a California clothing company that claims that Swift has been using Lucky 13 on merchandise when, in fact, that logo belongs to them.

    Blue Sphere, Inc. filed an infringement lawsuit against the 24-year old singer saying that they have been using Lucky 13 on their line of 1950s rock ‘n’ roll attire since 1991.

    “Swift’s conduct has been and will continue to be malicious, fraudulent, deliberate, willfull, intentional, and in disregard of Plaintiffs’ intellectual property rights,” the suit reads, adding that Swift “undeniably and squarely fits within the exact same consumer demographic” that the Lucky 13 brand markets and sells to.

    In 2009, Swift told MTV News why 13 was her lucky number.

    “The significance of the number 13 on my hand … I paint this on my hand before every show because 13 is my lucky number – for a lot of reasons,” she explained. “It’s really weird.”

    Swift continued, “Not only is it the day she was born on in December 1989, but over the years it has become so much more. I was born on the 13th. I turned 13 on Friday the 13th. My first album went gold in 13 weeks. My first #1 song had a 13-second intro. Every time I’ve won an award I’ve been seated in either the 13th seat, the 13th row, the 13th section or row M, which is the 13th letter.”

    Blue Sphere, Inc., also pointing out that Swift has a partnership with American Greetings Corp. to market Lucky 13 greeting card contests, has claimed that they have tried to contact Swift several times but there was never any resolution

    “There can be no doubt that Swift – who has an extensive trademark portfolio and numerous business and licensing partners, and whose record label is even named the ‘Big Machine’ – knows, understands and substantially profits from her carefully cultivated and meticulously managed trademarks and brand, image, and other intellectual property,” the suit reads.

    As well as infringement, the suit alleges trademark dilution and unfair competition and seeks Swift’s profit and Lucky 13’s lost profit and damages.

    Any request for comment from Swift or her people has not been returned.

    Image via YouTube

  • Pitbull Sues Spirits Company Over Vodka Recipe

    Pitbull is suing the E. & J. Winery & New Amsterdam Spirits Company for naming their new vodka recipe the ‘Pit Bull.’ The rapper trademarked his name back in 2000 and alleges that the company has been using his trademark in their efforts to promote the alcoholic beverage. The drink is made up of 2 parts New Amsterdam vodka, 1/2 part lime juice, 1/2 part grapefruit juice, and parts lemon/lime soda.

    Pitbull endorses Voli vodka, which is featured both in his music video Give Me Everything and in the lyrics of his song Rain Over Me.

    “[Voli] gave me a great opportunity to be an owner of a brand that I really believed in,” he told the Los Angeles Times when he first became involved with the brand. “That’s why I got involved with Voli. It’s in a market where it’s needed and everybody wants it.”

    The rapper is now demanding that the E. & J. Winery & New Amsterdam Spirits Company provides him with compensation for their earnings made from the Pit Bull. He also wants them to stop using the name immediately.

    A couple of months ago Pitbull’s Voli brand was targeted in a lawsuit over a young man’s death at the scene of one of their promotional events. A boat featuring the Voli logo ran aground, prompting the captain to ask for help from the promo attendees. One of them got too close to the engine and was killed at the event.

    Pitbull’s Voli brand is a low-calorie fruit-flavored vodka line–not completely unlike the Pit Bull the defendant’s company was serving.

    In happier news, Pitbull appeared at the Billboard Music Awards on Sunday night where he performed his new song We Are One. The song debuted on Friday.

    Do you think the rapper will win his lawsuit or will lawyers argue that he doesn’t hold a trademark for the different spelling of his name?

    Image via Twitter

  • Rick Ross Sued For Not Showing Up At Gig, Lawyers Can’t Find Him

    Rick Ross is a famous rapper known for starting the Maybach Music Group. He’s also on the run from a lawsuit filed by a concert promoter in Britain.

    The New York Post reports that Christian Ezechie, a promoter for Executive Decision, booked Ross and other acts through Maybach Music Group for a 2012 concert. He allegedly paid Ross $100,000 up front and paid $100,000 more for the other acts. After receiving the advance payment, Ross never showed up to the gig. Since then, Ezechie has been trying to track Ross down.

    While Ross is relatively easy to find, serving him a summons has proved difficult. Ezechie claims that Rick Ross Touring’s registered address leads to a UPS Store in Florida. They went to his home and those inside told said they didn’t know how to contact the rapper. Ezechie’s law firm has even attempted to serve a summons during Ross’ concerts, but are too afraid to approach him thanks to the rapper’s security guards.

    If this seems ridiculous, it is. It’s obviously weighing heavily on Ezechie as well. He told the court that Ross has committed “blatant robbery” and the amount allegedly stolen is absurd considering Ross is worth around $50 million.

    So, what is Ross doing besides running from a summons? Well, he’s still touring and what appears to be his Twitter account has only recently started to see some activity again since it last saw some action back in January. In fact, his latest post seems to convey that Ross is doing just fine:

    He’s also writing an advice column in Rolling Stone:

    While Ross may be able to run for now, he may not be able to for much longer. The judge in the case has ruled that Ezechie can use an “alternative service” is Ross doesn’t answer the summons by June 4. In other words, Ezechie can start sending out the summon through newspapers, email and other forms where it’s most likely to be seen by more people.

    If it’s any consolation, Britain apparently didn’t miss much by having Ross skip on the gig:

    Image via RickRossVEVO/YouTube

  • Jerry Sandusky Fights to Receive State Pension

    After being found guilty of 45 counts of sexual abuse pertaining to the Penn State scandal and being sentenced to at least 30 years in prison, former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky is fighting to have his state pension reinstated. Pennsylvania’s State Employees Retirement System (SERS) says that Sandusky forfeited his pension of $59,000 per year because of the nature of his crimes.

    Sandusky’s pension was revoked by SERS in October 2012 after he was found guilty in the child sex abuse case. Sandusky’s lawyers argue that he is still eligible to receive his pension because when Sandusky retired in 1999, sex crimes wasn’t an offense that could cause one’s pension to be forfeited–sex crimes weren’t added until 2004.

    While it is true that Sandusky retired as Penn State’s assistant football coach in 1999, Sandusky did maintain an office at Penn State until 2011 through his work with The Second Mile. The Second Mile is the nonprofit organization founded by Jerry Sandusky for underprivileged kids that gave him access to the children he was accused of abusing.

    Even though Sandusky never received a paycheck from Penn State after officially retiring, which is a requirement for him to be considered a school employee, SERS says that Sandusky’s continued professional relationship with Penn State makes his case an exception.

    Sandusky had an agreement with former Penn State Athletic Director Tim Curley for the university to work with The Second Mile, plus SERS says that the office and other perks the university provided Sandusky, such as football tickets, were forms of compensation. This agreement was documented in letters written back and forth between Sandusky and Curley.

    “The letter agreement puts lie to Sandusky’s contention that he ‘retired’ in 1999,” SERS attorneys wrote. “If anything, in June 1999, Sandusky retired from his position as football coach, but then continued as PSU employee in a new ‘outreach’ position…To be sure, the agreement was not an ordinary contract or employment arrangement. But, from the Penn State perspective, Sandusky was not an ordinary man.”

    If Jerry Sandusky isn’t successful in getting his pension reinstated, his wife Dottie Sandusky will also “lose the ability to collect a 50 percent survivor’s benefit for the remainder of her life” should her husband pass before she does. Dottie (pictured below) still maintains that her husband never abused any young boys. “He’s not guilty of these horrific crimes,” Dottie said during an interview in March. Of the showers, Dottie said, “That’s the generation that Jerry grew up in…They’d have soap battles or whatever.”

    Image via YouTube

  • Buffalo Bills Cheerleaders Sue Team Over Pay

    On Tuesday, five former Buffalo Bills cheerleaders filed a lawsuit against the NFL team over an unfair pay system.

    The girls, known as the Buffalo Jills, claim that they were required to work hundreds of hours at games and mandatory public appearances for little to no pay.

    Because the team classifies their cheerleaders as independent contractors, they are exempt from the state’s $8 minimum wage law and other workplace policies.

    Two members of the squad, along with their attorney Frank Dolce, held a press conference on Tuesday. “We are Bills fans,” said Dolce. “We definitely want our organization and other organizations in the NFL to respect the rights of these cheerleaders.”

    When the girls signed up for the team, they never expected the costs that would come along with it. Not only do they have to pay $650 for their uniforms, for which they are not reimbursed, they also receive no pay for practices or games and are required to make 20-35 public appearances each season.

    Aside from the money, the girls also claim that they received degrading and demeaning treatment. They revealed that they were subjected to “jiggle tests” in which they would have to shake in front of their coach to see if any part of their bodies jiggled. They also were required to wear bikinis to several events, and received sexual advances and comments from the public.

    According to the girls, the team controlled everything they did, including their personal lives. “Everything from standing in front of us with a clipboard having us do a jiggle test to see what parts of our body were jiggling,” Alyssa U., one of the former cheerleaders, said, “and if that was something that she saw, you were getting benched.”

    The Buffalo Bills are not the only team facing a lawsuit from former cheerleaders. The Oakland Raiders and Cincinnati Bengals have suits pending against them as well.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Lululemon Shares Fall After Analyst Criticizes Company’s Lack Of Strategy

    Lululemon shares took a beating today after a Sterne analyst said the company didn’t provide an effective plan for growth. The company’s share price was down 2.64 points before trading ended today, but the price has risen 0.06 points in after hours trading. While a falling share price is certainly trouble, this isn’t the first time that the athletic wear company has been in hot water this year.

    Back in March, Lululemon announced that it was recalling a number of its popular black Luon yoga pants. The company said that the affected pants were affected by a lack of coverage that left the sheerness at a level the company said fell short of its “very high standards.” After the recall began, some customers reported that they were asked to wear their yoga pants in front of employees to prove that they were of inferior quality and shareholders even sued the company claiming that it should have properly tested the yoga pants before shipping them to stores. The lawsuit was dismissed earlier this month.

    So, why did Lululemon’s share price take a hit? It would appear that the company finally has all its ducks in a row after all. As it turns out, the company isn’t impressing shareholders and analysts anymore now than it was earlier this month. Sam Poser, an analyst with Sterne Agee & Leach, Inc., says the company “did not provide any updates on its long-short-term financial objectives.” He also added that the company “did not address in specific terms plans to reengage with the customer at the store level and reignite new customer acquisition.” In the end, Sterne rated the company “underperform.”

    Other players on Wall Street have been skeptical of the company as well. The Street rated Lululemon’s shares as a Hold and said that it could neither justify a positive or negative rating relative to other stocks. It says that the company has shown solid revenue growth, but warns that its stock performance over the last year has been “generally disappointing.”

    So, what does Poser say the company needs to do to turn things around? It’s really quite simple:

    “A detailed constructive strategy, beyond the improved product, not just words, is needed to rebuild the aspirational quality of the Lululemon brand,” Poser wrote. “Most of those who do not see the brand as damaged are loyal Lululemon customers, but new customers are needed for the long-term success of both the company and the stock.”

    Maybe the company should heed the advice it gave to its fans on Friday:

    [h/t: Bloomberg]
    Image via lululemon/YouTube

  • 8THEIST License Plate: Woman Files Lawsuit Over Vanity Plate Rejection

    A New Jersey woman has filed a lawsuit after the state’s Motor Vehicle Commission (MVC) denied her request for a vanity license plate that reads “8THEIST.” The license plate was rejected because it is considered “objectionable.” After the woman discovered that her request would have been approved had it been a Christian vanity plate, she felt that her First Amendment rights were violated and eventually decided to sue.

    Shannon Morgan applied for the 8THEIST license plate through New Jersey’s MVC website back in November. The system flagged her submission because the plate was deemed “objectionable.” According to the New Jersey MVC’s rules on vanity plates, “No personalized plate combination, which is considered offensive, will be approved for issuance.”

    After her first submission was rejected, Morgan then submitted “BAPTIST” for a vanity plate to see if a Christian license plate would be rejected. Unlike the 8THEIST plate, this submission was not flagged by the system. “There is nothing offensive about being atheist,” Morgan said. “I should be able to express my sincerely held beliefs with a license plate just like everyone else.”

    The Leesburg woman contacted the MVC to find out why her submission was denied when the Christian plate was accepted, but never received a response. Morgan eventually decided to file a lawsuit on the basis that her First Amendment rights were violated. She is being represented by a lawyer with the Americans United for Separation of Church and State group.

    “The state of New Jersey is favoring religion while disparaging non-belief,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “It simply has no right to do that. This license plate issue may seem like a small matter but it is indicative of a much larger problem–atheists are often treated by the government as second-class citizens.”

    The lawsuit was filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. In addition to suing for the right to be granted the 8THEIST license plate, Morgan also wants to be reimbursed for legal fees.

    “Ms. Morgan is an atheist who wishes to display a New Jersey license plate that identifies herself as such. She is offended by the Commission’s decision to prohibit her from obtaining this plate,” the lawsuit reads. “The Commission’s declaration that this self-expression is ‘objectionable’ demeans her viewpoint.”

    Interestingly enough, the New Jersey DVC was faced with a similar issue last year when David Silverman wanted to put “ATHE1ST” on a vanity plate. Silverman (posing with a retired “ATHEIST” vanity plate above) was initially denied the plate, but the decision was later reversed.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • ‘X-Men’ Director Named in Teen Sex Abuse Lawsuit

    A lawsuit filed on Wednesday has accused X-Men film franchise director Bryan Singer of sexually abusing a teenage male 15 years ago. According to a civil suit filed in U.S. District Court in Hawaii, Singer had offered the 17-year-old aspiring actor a role in an X-Men film, and likewise threatened to destroy his career, if the teen failed to acknowledge the director’s sexual advances.

    Jeff Herman, the attorney who filed the suit, chose Hawaii, as that state had enacted legislature allowing for old sex abuse cases to be filed. Though, the window for these claims closes next week, right in time for Singer’s upcoming X-Men: Days of Future Past, which hits theaters in May.

    The lawsuit details alleged sex abuse incidents that occurred in 1998 and 1999, mostly during parties at a California mansion, when the plaintiff was 17. The suit alleges that other casting couch scenarios occurred during two visits to Hawaii, adding that Singer “manipulated his power, wealth, and position in the entertainment industry to sexually abuse and exploit the underage Plaintiff through the use of drugs, alcohol, threats and inducements which resulted in Plaintiff suffering catastrophic psychological and emotional injuries.”

    Here is the final trailer for X-Men: Days of Future Past:

    The lawsuit adds that Singer “promised acting roles to Plaintiff in an X-Men movie, in commercials, and in other of his projects, and professed that he would arrange for Plaintiff to audition for roles and projects in others’ productions.”

    A representative for Singer commented, “We are very confident that Bryan will be vindicated in this absurd and defamatory lawsuit. It is obvious that this case was filed in an attempt to get publicity at the time when Bryan’ s new movie is about to open in a few weeks.” The representative added that the accusations were “completely without merit.”

    The $250 million X-Men: Days of Future Past has an all-star cast including Jennifer Lawrence, Hugh Jackman, Peter Dinklage and Michael Fassbender, and opens on May 23.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Phaedra Parks Responds to Fraud Rumors in Affidavit

    Real Housewives of Atlanta reality star Phaedra Parks recently came forward stating that she had no involvement in any fraudulent acts.

    Parks’ husband, Apollo Nida, is currently facing prison time for identity theft, stolen cars, and bank frauds if he doesn’t reach a plea deal by April 25.

    Throughout the entire ordeal, Parks has appeared to be quite calm about the matter. So, it’s no surprise that at least one person would be a little suspicious about Parks’ impartiality.

    One published author asserts that the RHOA celebrity was the mastermind behind all of it and not Nida-as many have claimed.

    Angela Stanton, the writer of Lies of a Real Housewife, argues that her former friend and lawbreaking partner certainly played a major part in Nida’s swindles.

    In the book, Stanton mentions how the “crooked snake” and her hubby were both in charge of a “criminal enterprise.”

    The allegations were soon followed by a defamation lawsuit after the book was published in 2o12.

    New information now displays Parks’ response to the rumors.

    She decided to defend her reputation in an affidavit, which was filed March 31 in Gwinnett County, Georgia.

    Parks plans to use the court documents as evidence against Stanton.

    According to the written statement:

    Due to the falsity of the material in the book, and to protect her reputation, on or about September 26, 2012, [Parks] filed a defamation action against [Stanton].

    Stanton knew the statements she made about the plaintiff were false when she made them. I have no knowledge of or connection with any ‘bank fraud scheme and was never involved in any criminal enterprise with [Stanton].

    I have never been arrested for a crime or charged with any crime, I have never been questioned by any law enforcement agency about any possible involvement in a crime. I have never been involved in any criminal schemes with Defendant Stanton or anyone else. I have never committed any crime other than routine traffic violations.

    What do you think? Is Parks really capable of fraud?

    Well, if so, that’s surely not how a ‘southern belle’ is supposed to conduct oneself.

    View Part One of Stanton’s tell-all interview:

    Image via YouTube