A nonprofit organization in Utah is suing the U.S. Forest Service, demanding that the park service lift its ban on snowboarding at Alta ski resort. The group, Wasatch Equality, claims the park service's ban violates snowboarders' rights to equal protection under the U.S. Constitution.

In a recent court filing, the U.S. Attorney's Office for Utah asked a judge to dismiss the case on grounds that the government has sovereign immunity and that snowboarders are not a protected class. In the filing, the federal government also said it has discretion about what activities can take place on public lands.

“For example, the United States may decide to allow fishing within a wildlife refuge, but it may choose to limit particular waters within that refuge only to fly fishing, which necessarily excludes other type of fishing,” assistant U.S. Attorney Jared Bennett wrote.

A hearing in the case is expected in the coming weeks.

—Source: fox13now.com

An Illinois judge recently dismissed a class-action lawsuit against the world's biggest online poker room, PokerStars, finding that the poker players never lost money directly to the website.

Kelly Sonnenberg of Illinois brought the lawsuit on behalf of "possibly millions" of Illinois players who had lost money on the PokerStars website.  According to news reports, Sonnenberg used an old statute which allowed anyone to sue a perpetrator who had defrauded someone by way of gambling. Under the Loss Recovery Act, Sonnenberg would have been able to recover three times the losses suffered by victims.

However, Chief Judge David R. Herndon of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, tossed out the case, finding that players only paid rake to PokerStars and that they lost money to countless opponents at the tables. In his ruling, the judge said that PokerStars is "more akin to a third party service provider that provides a forum for others to play the game and does not have a stake in how the game is decided."

PokerStars lawyer David Deitch says that he hopes other states with similar ancient statutes will look to the outcome of this case before deciding to try ones similar in their own jurisdictions. He pointed out that it was very important to understand the “principle that a ‘rake’ does not make a company a ‘winner’.”

—Source: legalnewsonline.com

A former server at Washington, D.C.'s iconic W Hotel's P.O.V. Lounge, with views of the White House, is suing her former employer, claiming that it retaliated against her for complaining about the uniforms.

Jahaira Bratton, a server at P.O.V. from 2010 to 2013, described the uniform in her complaint as "halter tops and very short skirts with a slit up the back."  According to Bratton, waitresses were not allowed to wear a supportive bra at work.

"If any of the girls came in with a bra on, they would say, 'No, you can't do that,'" said Jennifer Bezdicek, Bratton's attorney.  "She's very large-breasted, and they wouldn't let them wear bras or normal bras with it. It kind of looked ridiculous and looked sluttier than it should have."

According to news reports, Bratton is seeking $350,000 in damages.

—Source: washingtoncitypaper.com

A high school senior who sued her parents recently dismissed her complaint after a judge denied her request for high school tuition and current living expenses.
 
Rachel Canning, 18, of Lincoln Park, New Jersey, sued her parents, Sean and Elizabeth, for financial support and college tuition. In the lawsuit, Canning alleged that her parents forced her out of their home, leaving her to pay the remaining tuition for her last semester at her private high school, her current living and transportation expenses, her upcoming college tuition and reimbursement to her friend’s parents for legal fees. An honor student and cheerleader, Rachel said she left home because of emotional and psychological mistreatment, alleging, among other things, that her mother called her "fat" and "porky" and that her father threatened to beat her.
 
The parents countered that Rachel left home because she didn’t want to obey their rules. According to court documents, Rachel was suspended from school for truancy in October and her parents told her that she could no longer see her boyfriend who also was suspended from school. After her parents took away her car and phone privileges, Rachel skipped school again and decided to run away.
 
After receiving allegations that Rachel was being abused, New Jersey's Division of Child Protection and Permanency interviewed the teen, her parents and her two younger sisters, but it ultimately "determined that allegations of emotional abuse was unfounded," a letter from the agency states.
 
Superior Court Judge Peter A. Bogaard recently denied Rachel’s request for high school tuition and current living expenses. After a hearing date was set for the remaining claims, Rachel withdrew the lawsuit, prompting Judge Bogaard to rule that Canning's "decision to dismiss the litigation was a knowing and voluntary decision."
 
Angelo Sarno, the attorney representing Canning's parents, said in a written statement Tuesday that some level of normalcy has returned to the family. "The case is over. It's time to move on. The Cannings want nothing more than to resume their lives as a family," Sarno said.
 
—Source:  cnn.com