A California woman is threatening to sue a Starbuck’s barista for half of the $100,000 in donations the barista received after the customer took to social media complaining the barista refused to serve her because she wasn’t wearing a mask.

Amber Gilles says she posted a photo of barista Lenin Gutierrez with the caption: "Meet Lenen from Starbucks who refused to serve me cause I’m not wearing a mask. Next time I will wait for cops and bring a medical exemption." Gilles' post exploded online, with a GoFundMe to raise tip money for Gutierrez collecting more than $100,000.

Gilles claims she has medical problems preventing her from wearing a mask and that Gutierrez’s action constituted discrimination.

"I get shortness of breath, dizziness and it messes with the heartbeat," said Gilles. "And I do have asthma as well, and I do get 'maskne'. So there’s several things going on and not only that but it doesn’t even work."

According to news reports, Gilles shared two pieces of paperwork to support her claim of a medical exemption — one of which was a 2015 doctor’s report on an ovarian cyst.

Gilles wants half of the GoFundMe money donated, and is threatening to sue. Noting that lawyers are expensive, Gilles has started her own GoFundMe to raise legal fees.

Starbucks now requires customers to wear facial coverings or masks in all 9,000 of its company-owned American stores. Customers who refuse to wear a mask inside can order using delivery, the drive-thru or curbside pickup, the company said. 

—Source: nsxttv.com

With bars closed in Florida due to coronavirus, it seems house parties have become the new party scene for some.

The City of Miami is suing a homeowner of two properties who neighbors say is hosting large, loud parties, some with as many as 400 attendees. In the once peaceful neighborhood of Belle Meade Island, neighbors have been accumulating photos of the parties taking place at the rental homes, likening them to the new South Beach.

“I call it a horror show, a combination of many nuisances, people driving their cars and speeding, just the amount of cars,” said resident Rita Legace. “There’s just a combo of everything. You do not know when it’s going to happen. You may have company and it’s embarrassing for people to come to your house and see the shenanigans next door. The music is so loud, it’s not normal.”

From girls dancing on rooftops to massages to rappers filming videos, Legace feels she has seen it all. She said a lot of the parties are advertised through social media fliers, where people can purchase tickets to attend.

Despite calls to code enforcement officials and police and cease and desist letters sent this spring, the parties rage on. The City of Miami is now filing a lawsuit against the homeowner, listed as John Petrozza.

“It’s like banging your head against the wall. You just don’t get anywhere,” said Legace who has retained an attorney of her own.

“I am proud to represent Ms. Lagace in regaining the peace and quiet she rightfully expects to enjoy in her home,” said Legace’s attorney, Mary Ann Ruiz. “We thank the City of Miami, City Attorney, Victoria Mendez, and Assistant City Attorney, Rachel S. Dooley, for filing a civil lawsuit to return Belle Meade Island to the peaceful and quiet residential neighborhood it has always been.”

—Source: miami.cbslocal.com

A Missouri man recently sued Apple for $1 trillion, which, if successful, would make him the richest man on earth, overtaking Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates.

Raevon Terrell Parker is suing Apple, claiming the tech giant kept his iPhone 7 after a repair and used “special features” on his phone to develop features in iOS, Apple's mobile operating system. According to news sources, Parker claimed his phone had a special beta version on iOS that gave him special functionality. In his handwritten lawsuit, Parker stated, “The attendant in the Apple Store fixed the device but kept it by deceiving the Plaintiff knowing that it was the first phone to have new features.”

In seeking $1 trillion in damages, Parker justifies the amount by stating he cannot be “compensated for being labeled ‘crazy’”, but that his claim would cover "hospitalizations, travel, distress, humiliation, embarrassment, defamation of character.”

A similar lawsuit filed by Parker in 2019 was unsuccessful.

—Source: dmarge.com

The Vermont Supreme Court has remanded a case back to the lower court for a jury to determine if the defendants knew or should have known that their dog was a probable source of danger.

The plaintiffs, Amber Bradley, Billy Noyes, and their son Tyler Noyes, are suing Amber’s parents (Tyler’s grandparents) after their recently acquired dog, Bobo, attacked Tyler. In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs claim John and Sharon Bradley negligently allowed the dog to attack the boy.

According to the lawsuit, the dog had been around the owners’ other grandchildren on numerous occasions without incident, but this was the first time Tyler had met the dog. With Bobo chained to a garage, Tyler approached him from behind to stand near his grandfather, John. When Tyler went to touch Bobo, the dog grabbed him, threw him in the air and then onto the ground, attacking him.

The lower court, following Vermont case law precedent, concluded defendants did not have reason to know Bobo was a probable source of danger despite the previous owner noting the dog had once growled at his son and that he “had always had off feelings about the dog." On appeal, the Vermont Supreme Court agreed with plaintiffs, ruling that “a genuine dispute of facts exists as to whether defendants ‘had some reason to know the animal was a probable source of danger,'” sending the case back to the lower court for a jury to determine if defendants had reason to know the dog was probably dangerous.

—Source: law.justia.com