Joe Biden's inexorable march toward the fanatical left continued this week, as he and Bernie Sanders…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Biden Drug Plan Would Slash Innovation and U.S. Consumer Access

Joe Biden's inexorable march toward the fanatical left continued this week, as he and Bernie Sanders (D - Vermont) introduced their "unity platform" in anticipation of this year's Democratic convention.  We can thus add weaker U.S. patents and drug price controls imported from foreign nations to Biden's existing dumpster fire of bad ideas.

Here's the problem.  As we've often emphasized, and contrary to persistent myth, American consumers enjoy far greater access to new lifesaving drugs than people in other nations, including those in "other advanced economies" (Biden's words) whose price controls Biden seeks to import:

Of all new cancer drugs developed worldwide between 2011 and 2018, 96% were available to American consumers.  Meanwhile, only 56% of those drugs became available in Canada…[more]

July 10, 2020 • 04:52 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
Trying to Become the Richest Man in the World
Thursday, July 02 2020

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

Does Your Dog Bite?
Wednesday, June 24 2020

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

The Eagle has Landed… Some Lawsuits
Thursday, June 18 2020

Giant Eagle, a grocery store chain located throughout the Mid-Atlantic region, is facing more than thirty lawsuits over its face mask policy, which plaintiffs claim is discriminatory.

According to news reports, one Giant Eagle store posted publicly, “It’s too easy to make up an excuse not to wear a mask, and we refuse to put our team members and customers who do wear a mask at any more risk than they already are.” Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf set a policy in mid-April that businesses require customers and workers at essential businesses to wear masks on the premises. The lawsuits argue that Giant Eagle’s policy exceeds the state mandate that allows for children and people with disabilities or a medical condition to forgo a mask. Several of the plaintiffs allege they were yelled at and physically escorted from the premises after they tried to shop without masks.

More than 30 lawsuits have been filed since late May, all by attorney Thomas Anderson. The plaintiffs suffer from conditions ranging from lung fibrosis to vasovagal scope, post-traumatic stress disorder, allergies and chronic sinusitis. Charges brought against the company include retaliation and coercion in violation of the ADA, assault and battery and others.

Source: triblive.com

A Royally Interesting Lawsuit
Wednesday, June 10 2020

A couple from England who are part of the British aristocracy sued to get their deposit back on a $5.5 million Park Avenue co-op purchase deal gone south.

According to news reports, Lady Eva-Marie Houstoun-Boswall and Sir Alford Houstoun-Boswall, who own houses in London, France, the Bahamas, and New York City, put a $535,000 deposit down on a unit in New York City at 730 Park Avenue, near the preschool at which they intended to enroll their 2-year-old son. Following an interview with the coop board, which was conducted via Zoom due to international travel restrictions, they were informed that moving in during a pandemic would be difficult and would have to take place all at once. The board approved the sale in early April.

After back and forth between the buyers and seller’s attorneys regarding moving in, the buyers allege they received nothing more than “bland replies” about the seller wanting to close. The correspondence ended with the seller’s attorney sending a “time is of the essence” notice in early May, indicating closing needed to happen by June 10 or buyers would be deemed in default and lose their deposit. According to the lawsuit, this notice occurred despite the coop board’s ban on any move in or move outs as of April 30.

The Houstoun-Boswalls now claim they no longer want the apartment, especially given that they have since enrolled their son at a preschool in London.

Despite filing the lawsuit, Morrell Berkowitz, who is representing the Houstoun-Boswalls in the lawsuit, said he had reached an agreement with the defendants’ attorney to keep the couple’s deposit in escrow for now.

“At least at this stage, we probably do not have to have the court intervene with a decision one way or the other,” he said.

Source: therealdeal.com

An Avalanche of Lawsuits
Thursday, June 04 2020

A class action lawsuit seeking more than $5,000,000 has been filed against Vail Resorts, claiming it violated numerous California laws when it ended the 2019-2020 ski season early due to coronavirus.

The main plaintiff, Brian Hunt, a resident of California who purchased the annual Tahoe Local season pass for $499, filed the lawsuit “on behalf of all of Defendant’s customers nationwide that purchased annual passes for the 2019-2020 season to Epic Day Passes for the 2019-2020 season who, as of March 25, 2020, had not used up all of the days remaining.”

Hunt wants passholder fees refunded because he claims the pass, valid until June, lost value when the North American resorts closed for the season on March 17. “Plaintiff continues to face imminent harm, as the defendant retains annual passholder’s season pass fees while all of its resorts remain closed,” the lawsuit states.

According to news reports, among the allegations against Vail Resorts are a violation of California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act (which protects the customer from product misrepresentation), a violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law, a violation of California’s False Advertising Law, as well as a breach of express warranty, negligent misrepresentation, and fraud.

Source: outtherecolorado.com



Question of the Week   
In which one of the following years was the National Park Service established?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"Allowing third parties to collect election ballots, a term sometimes called 'ballot harvesting,' is unconstitutional if it creates 'wide opportunity for fraud,' Trump campaign senior legal adviser Jenna Ellis says.'I think that ballot harvesting is definitely opening up a ripe opportunity for fraud,' Ellis told Just the News in an interview, while acknowledging there is no language in the Constitution…[more]
 
 
—Carrie Sheffield, Just the News White House Correspondent
— Carrie Sheffield, Just the News White House Correspondent
 
Liberty Poll   

Do you currently expect your local schools to reopen on time in the fall?