WebProNews

Tag: sued

  • Glenn Beck Faces Defamation Lawsuit by Boston Marathon Victim

    Political commentator Glenn Beck is being sued for defaming a Saudi Arabian man injured during the Boston Marathon bombings last April 2013.

    The bombing, which took the lives of three people and injured more than 200 event-goers, was said to be the doing of two brothers from Russia.

    Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, was detained, charged with 30 federal charges, and currently awaits trial in November. If convicted he may face the death penalty.

    His accomplice and older brother, 26-year-old Tamerlan Tsarnaev, died in a shootout with police officers four days following the bombings.

    Yet, Beck claimed at the time that there was a third perpetrator who was “the money man” behind the attack.

    Twenty-year-old Abdulrahman Alharbi-a college student in the Boston area-was attending the event near the marathon’s finish line when the bombs were detonated.

    FBI investigators later interrogated Alharbi and searched his home, but officials determined that he had nothing to do with the attack.

    However, Alharbi came under further persecution and this time the accusations were done publicly.

    Alharbi accuses Beck for intentionally causing harm to his reputation during a live segment on TheBlaze TV.

    On April 22, just seven days following the Boston Marathon bombings, Beck asserted that the whole attack was a cover-up and that Alharbi was involved.

    View the segment here:

    “The government has not come clean nor has really any of the mainstream media,” he said. “The government is out and out lying to you. They are engaging in a disinformation campaign to discredit and destroy.”

    According to the defamation lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court Friday, Beck “repeatedly and falsely identified Mr. Alharbi as an active participant in the crimes that were committed on April 15, 2013, repeatedly questioned the motives of federal officials in failing to pursue or detain Alharbi and repeatedly and falsely accused Mr. Alharbi of being a criminal who had funded the attacks at the Boston Marathon.”

    Alharbi also states that Beck identified him as a murderer, terrorist, and the brains behind the bombings.

    The lawsuit will seek unspecified damages and lawyer fees from Beck and his network.

    Beck’s reps have yet to respond to the lawsuit.

    Image via YouTube

  • Eli Manning Sued over Bogus Memorabilia

    It’s a tough week for Eli Manning. Not only does he have to watch America swoon over his older brother as Peyton takes his Denver Broncos to the Super Bowl, now he’s being sued for allegedly passing off bogus memorabilia.

    A lawsuit filed in New Jersey on Wednesday claims that several New York Giants players have routinely passed off new jerseys and helmets to collectors and dealers, fronting them as authentic “game worn” items. The complaint even alleges that the Manning helmet from Eli’s 2008 Super Bowl win currently on display at the Pro Football Hall of Fame is bogus.

    Named in the filing are are Manning, the Giants, Inc., CEO John Mara, team lawyer William Heller, CFO Christine Procops, locker room manager Ed Wagner Jr., and equipment managers Joe and Ed Skiba, and the team’s dry cleaner. Yes, the dry cleaner, Barry Barone, who has worked for the team since 1982. Barone is alleged to have used his dry cleaning equipment to age jerseys and other items of clothing, going so far as cutting them with scissors and repairing them to heighten the illusion of authenticity.

    The suit even has a smoking gun. In an exchange between memorabilia dealer Eric Inselberg and Joe Skiba, Inselberg asks, “Hey Joe, my buddy was offered an eli game used helmet and jersey. Are these the bs ones eli asked you to make up because he didnt want to give up the real stuff?” Skiba, replying from his official Giants email address, responded, “BS ones, you are correct.” Maybe that was Skiba being sarcastic—he may certainly claim so in court—but someone should remind him that sarcasm doesn’t always come across in an email.

    Other alleged forgeries include several Manning jerseys, two 2012 Super Bowl helmets, and a 2004 rookie season Manning helmet. Manning himself allegedly conspired in the scam so that he could hang on to his personal items.

    Earlier today, a Giants spokesperson attacked the filing, saying, “this suit is completely without any merit whatsoever and we will defend it vigorously. We will not otherwise comment on pending litigation.” Eli Manning has so far declined to make any comment.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Feds Charge Walmart: They Broke Labor Laws

    Feds Charge Walmart: They Broke Labor Laws

    The nation’s largest retailer is no stranger to criticism, it has in the past, been associated with child slave labor issues in countries such as Bangladesh.

    Wal-Mart is infamous for its unfair labor laws and employment practices. Last year alone, the company reported a net income of over $11 billion dollars. An amount of money that should be ample to remedy some of their workplace practices with regard to wage law violations, inadequate health care, exploitation, and their anti-union stance.

    These facts could account for some of the 5,000 lawsuits that are filed against Wal-Mart each year, which calculates to approximately 17 lawsuits per day.

    That is a lot of unfairness – but they do employ 1.4 million people in the U.S. alone, about 1 percent of the population, so bad things are bound to happen.

    And they did happen, and the Feds are all over them. Federal officials have filed a formal complaint charging that Wal-Mart violated the rights of protesting and striking workers last year.

    The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), says Wal-Mart illegally fired, disciplined or threatened more than 60 employees for striking, or as the NLRB put it, for participating in legally protected activities to complain about wages and working conditions.

    Striking is an American right that goes as far back as the early 1800’s. The Feds see it that way too.

    The NLRB found that Wal-Mart in more than a dozen states had seen this labor malfunction.

    In the complaint filed by the NLRB, they included an inner-office memorandum that Wal-Mart sent to its striking employees, it read:

    “[I]t is very important for you to understand that the company does not agree that these hit-and-run work stoppages are protected, and now that it has done the legal thinking on the subject, it will not excuse them in the future…Should you participate in further union-orchestrated intermittent work stoppages that are part of a common plan or design to disrupt and confuse the company’s business operations, you should expect that the Company will treat any such absence as it would any other unexcused absence….”

    Wal-Mart obviously just wants their employees to take their unfair practices, or go elsewhere. Knowing full well the country is in a recession and there really isn’t anywhere else to go.

    The complaint will go before an administrative law judge. If the judge rules for the employees, Wal-Mart could be liable to the workers for back pay, reinstatement of their jobs and removal of any disciplinary action the company enforced.

    In November last year, workers and labor activists staged hundreds of protests at Wal-Mart stores in many major cities across the U.S., including the Bay Area, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis and Washington, demanding pay increases and better working conditions. Employees also have accused the company of punishing workers who participate in these type of actions.

    “Wal-Mart thinks it can scare us with attacks to keep us from having a real conversation about the poverty wages we’re paid,” said Barbara Collins, a former Wal-Mart worker from Placerville, Calif., who is one of the 70 workers named in the NLRB complaint. “But too much is at stake, the strength of our economy and the security of our families, to stay silent about why Wal-Mart needs to improve jobs.

    Image via YouTube

  • Supreme Court to Hear Appeal of Graduate Student Sued for Reselling Textbooks

    The Supreme Court decided today that they will hear the case of graduate student Supap Kirtsaeng, who was sued by a publishing company for reselling textbooks he bought in Thailand.

    The final verdict in this case may have important implications in online sales of copyrighted material.

    Kirtsaeng was a math graduate trying to make ends meet as he completed school by reselling textbooks friends and family purchased for him abroad. He was successfully sued by text book publisher John Wiley & Sons to the tune of $600,000 after a jury decided he infringed on the companies copyrights.

    While studying at USC, Kirtsaeng arranged for family and friends to purchase textbooks for him in markets abroad, so that he could resell them in the U.S. for a profit.

    The larger issue at hand is if U.S. copyright laws apply to items made abroad and then sold in the U.S. without permission of the manufacturer. A similar verdict in the case of Costco and Swiss watch manufacturer Omega ended with a 4-4 split in the high court.

    Retailers engage in this kind of activity all the time. Retailers like Target, eBay and Amazon, make an estimated $63 billion on sales of items that are purchased abroad and resold in the United States without the permission of the manufacturer. This phenomenon, known as a parallel or grey market, benefits retailers and consumers in the U.S. alike, by lowering prices.

    In the meantime Kirtsaeng has already returned to Thailand, after completing his post-graduate work at the University of Southern California. Only eight books sold by Kirtsaeng were published by John Wiley & Son’s Asian subsidiary. How they came to the total of $600,000 dollars for a private seller is a absolute mystery. They must have been some really thorough textbooks.

    Kirtsaeng sold the books through eBay, who was one of the major outside parties pushing the court to decide the case in his favor.

    The case will be argued before the Supreme Court this fall.