Next month's arrival of a new Trump Administration, alongside a Congress ready to hit the ground running…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
ATSC 3.0: What Could It Mean for American Consumers?

Next month's arrival of a new Trump Administration, alongside a Congress ready to hit the ground running, promises a flurry of corrective activity after eight years of Barack Obama.

However, Americans should remain vigilant against regulatory mischief that some are trying to push through unnoticed at the outset of the new Administration and Congress.

Exhibit A:  An effort by broadcasters to convince Obama's Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to approve an entirely new broadcast television standard known as ATSC 3.0.

In a nutshell, the ATSC 3.0 standard amounts to yet another new federal action upon a private marketplace and a handout to a favored industry that could inflict significant and unnecessary costs, ultimately to be paid by consumers.

Under current law, cable and…[more]

December 02, 2016 • 04:24 pm

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Jester’s Courtroom
Madonna's Lawsuit Not in "Vogue"
Wednesday, November 30 2016

Pop star Madonna is suing the board of her Upper West Side (NY) co-op building, claiming the board illegally changed the terms of her lease on her $7.3 million pad to deny access to the apartment for her children or domestic help while she is out of town.

According to news reports, the board of One West 64th Street recently changed the terms of its lease agreements to ban anyone under 16 years old from living in an apartment unless someone over the age of 21 years old is in the residence. Madonna, who claims her world-renowned recording artist status keeps her constantly on tours and around the world, is demanding that the judge void the new lease terms and allow her housekeepers, nannies and four children - Lourdes (20), Rocco (16), David (11), and Mercy James (10) - to stay home while she is traveling.

In an affidavit filed in the case, Madonna referred to her unit as "home," adding that she purchased the apartment in 2008 and "[a]t this time I was, and still am, a world-known performing artist. At the time One West knew or should have known I traveled extensively and owned other residences. One West knew that I would not be physically present at all time."

Madonna further claims she is being denied the use of the apartment and that she has had to pay for alternate housing during the time of the dispute.

The housing board has asked the court to throw out the lawsuit, noting, among other defenses, that Madonna has made no effort to establish the home as a "primary residence." Madonna also owns a house on East 81st Street that is valued at $32.5 million. The board, which says the rules apply to everyone in the building, is asking that Madonna pay all of its legal fees.

Source: dailymail.com

Now Serving: A Hot, Fresh Lawsuit Against Krispy Kreme
Monday, November 21 2016

A California man is suing Krispy Kreme for millions of dollars, claiming "false and misleading business practices" by the donut giant for its "fruit" filled donuts.

Jason Saidian has filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, seeking $5 million. Saidian claims Krispy Kreme’s "Chocolate Iced Raspberry Filled," "Glazed Raspberry Filled," "Maple Bar," and "Glazed Blueberry Cake" products don’t actually contain real raspberries, maple or blueberries but use "nutritionally inferior ingredients." Saidian reportedly said he would never have purchased the items if he had been aware that they did not contain real fruit.

A Krispy Kreme spokesman declined to comment on ongoing litigation. 

Source:  modicanews.com

Kids' Climate Change Lawsuit Heats Up
Tuesday, November 15 2016

A federal judge in Eugene, Oregon, has denied the federal government's motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by 21 youth plaintiffs over global warming.

The children, whose ages range from nine to twenty, claim in their class action lawsuit that President Obama, the fossil fuel industry, and other federal agencies are violating their constitutional rights by declining to take action against climate change.

"We are standing here to fight and protect everything that we love—from our land to our waters to the mountains to the rivers and forests,” Xiuhtezcatl Martinez, a 16-year-old plaintiff said. “This is the moment where we decide what kind of legacy we are going to leave behind for future generations.”

 Despite the defendants' request to throw out the lawsuit, the judge ruled otherwise, calling man-made climate change an "undisputed fact".

"Federal courts too often have been cautious and overly deferential in the arena of environmental law, and the world has suffered for it," wrote U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken in her ruling.

Source:  slashdot.org and time.com

Finger Lickin' Not So Good
Wednesday, November 09 2016

A Mississippi man who was suing fried chicken chain Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen for failure to include a knife with his drive-thru order has dropped his lawsuit.

Paul Newton, Jr., an attorney who was representing himself, said he choked on a piece of fried chicken after he was forced to use his hands and teeth to tear a piece off the bone. Newton claimed he underwent emergency surgery to remove the piece of chicken from his throat.

Newton was seeking financial compensation and punitive damages, as well as a promise that all Popeyes drive-thru orders would include a plastic knife in addition to the spork already provided.

“I continue to believe that the facts demonstrate an unsafe condition to the public that could easily be solved by the responsible parties at very little cost,” Newton said in statement. “I am hopeful that my filing of the court proceeding results in such remedial actions. However, due to extreme comments directed to me and my family, I have determined not to pursue this matter further.”

Source:  consumerist.com

Fore!
Tuesday, November 01 2016

A New York couple that were suing the local golf course for errant golf balls on their property has won their case, but for only thousands of dollars in damages, rather than the millions they were seeking.
 
Leon and Gail Behar, who live on the second hole of the Quaker Ridge Golf Club, were reportedly seeking $3.3 million in punitive damages for nuisance, trespass and negligence by the club because hundreds of stray golf balls came into their yard. In an attempt to solve the issue, the Behars planted 45-foot trees in their yard and the club moved a tee box and added a 40-foot net.
 
After six years of court filings, hearings and appeals, and nine days in Westchester (N.Y.) Supreme Court, the club was ordered to pay the Behars $7,323.75
 
“It should not be unexpected that any house abutting a golf course, including the Behar’s house, would from time to time, receive three, four, five, or more balls on a given particular day of poor swings, and that there could be no liability on the part of a golf course for trespass, nuisance or concomitant damages," Judge Charles Wood said.
 
Source:  golfdigest.com



Question of the Week   
Where is the USS Arizona Memorial located?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"Life is not fair to losers, or the critics of Donald Trump, and the way he won the presidency. He just won't stand still and give the rotten eggs a chance to hit their mark. The Donald is conducting his transition to the White House in his own way, taking his time, choosing his Cabinet carefully, and rationing misery to his detractors. His critics, particularly in the know-it-all media, are having…[more]
 
 
—Wesley Pruden, The Washington Times
— Wesley Pruden, The Washington Times
 
Liberty Poll   

Which one of the following finalists would you favor to win the “Baracki,” a totally fake and fictitious award for the most fabulous fake news of 2016?