Posted by Michael Habib.

Many people today always hear about the search warrant and are police required to have probable cause to search a suspect’s cell phone. Recently, a case was heard in the Supreme Court regarding a robbery and police accessing information from the cell phone carriers that lead to Mr. Quartavious Davis’s arrest in Florida. Mr. Davis was convicted of a string of robberies in 2010 and was sentenced to approximately 162 years in prison, without parole. Mr. Davis challenged and argued that police did not access a search warrant when seeking information from his cellphone carrier MetroPCS Communications Inc. The information provided resulted and provided evidence of the approximate location of Mr. Davis during the time of the string of robberies. According to Lawrence Hurley, in May, the “11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the failure of obtaining a warrant did not violate Davis’ right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.” This lead Davis to seek Supreme Court review and the result was the same as the 11th U.S. Circuit court of Appeals. The big question here that is constantly brought up by many people is how much privacy people and business have? Specifically, the four main cell phone carriers Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint, should they fight to keep their customers information private? According to Lawrence Hurley, this information is requested by law enforcement tens of thousands times per year. Many lower level courts have similar cases regarding business protecting the privacy of their customers and infringement of privacy.

A counter-argument can be for purpose where businesses and law enforcement may want to have the availability of this information to quickly solve cases such as Mr. Davis’s robberies. Business owners may support this for the purpose to protect their business from these robberies, however other business such as the cell phone carriers may argue that this is infringement of privacy towards their customers and hurts their business.

Michael is an accounting major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Michael Habib.

A growing and popular phenomenon in the U.S. is fantasy football. A person reported by The New York Times won $350,000 on FanDuel in a contest. There are two companies that dominate the fantasy football market: FanDuel and DraftKings. “The two companies together enjoy 95% market share of the daily-fantasy industry, have come under the harsh light of regulatory scrutiny, with investigations launched by the New York State Attorney General and the FBI,” according to Daniel Roberts. Both of these companies ecently have been banned in the State of Nevada. The State of Nevada Gaming Control Board ruled that all unlicensed daily fantasy sports companies must cease and desist in the state. It is very ironic in the state with the largest gambling industry shuts down two major fantasy football companies.

Many argue that fantasy football is not gambling, but more skill. Nevada labels it as gambling and not a game of skill; now these companies need to obtain a gambling license to continue to do business in Nevada. Companies such as Draftpot, StarsDraft and even Yahoo’s daily fantasy football also now needs to obtain the gambling licenses. However, other state’s laws differ on the definition of gambling. In “Kansas a contest must prove only that it involves more skill than change.” In “Tennessee and Arkansas, the contest must prove it involved no change and all skill.” Currently, these companies operate in 44 states. Since some state laws are unfriendly to the gambling business, it affects fantasy football drastically. FanDuel and DrafitKings stated that this will only be a growing problem, however they will fight to have everybody back to enjoying the contest.

Michael is an accounting major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Ashley O’Connell.

Relating to the topic of criminal law, I found an article published on November 11, 2015 from FoxNews.com called, “‘The biggest sham’: Sheriffs fume at mass release of 6,000 federal inmates.” Numerous sheriffs, policeman, and local community attendees shared their concern in regards to their safety and their thoughts on the release of 6,112 inmates. These inmates were released from a federal prison and has caused worry for citizens in early November. The release took place at the El Reno federal Correctional institution in Oklahoma.

Participants of the criminal justice reform have stated how the process of the inmates being released is being highly monitored and “handled responsibly.” The idea of the inmates getting released came from a discussion from the U.S Sentencing Commission when they decided to “reduce sentences for most drug trafficking offenses.” Most of the criminals that were released had been in federal prison for nine years. In the article it states, “[Y]ou don’t have to be a sheriff to realize that a felon after nine years in jail isn’t going to be adding value to the community. A third are illegals and felons so they can’t work.” Reading this quote from the article opened my eyes and made me realize that I am not the only one with this opinion, and even sheriffs feel the same way but they cannot do anything about it.

The 6,112 inmates who were released are only a portion of the total number by the end of the year. Currently, there are 46,000 more cases in which are being investigated and reviewed. Of the number being reviewed along with the amount of people who were released, there is an uproar of concern of whether the inmates are going to be violent or not. A great point about this is brought up, “If the Obama administration is not capable of making honest and prudent decisions in securing our borders, how can we trust them to make the right decision on the release of prisons who may return to a life of crime? I’d be amazed if the 6,000 . . . being released are non-violent.” I agree with this statement in regards to the violence; I believe that there will be a handful of people who will be violent.

Criminal justice advocates disagree with the Sheriffs’ opinion and do not see the issue in releasing the inmates. Their defense was that there are always inmates that are being released and the 6,112 inmates this month are not going to make a difference. The article is closed with a great quote, “There are many sheriffs feeling as though the administration will go through the motions of asking the questions but really not care what the opinion or expert advice of law enforcement is.” With this closing quote, I completely agree with everything that was said in this article. I do believe that the law enforcement is not being taken seriously, and I am afraid of what will happen if more inmates get released on a daily basis.

Ashely is an accounting major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Justin Gandhi.

Cuban was originally accused of ditching a stock in 2004 called Mamma.com, a metasearch Internet company. He was accused of ditching this stock due to obtaining an inside tip on an upcoming offer that would have diluted his shares.

The SEC didn’t have much evidence on its side and claimed that Cuban ditched the stock in order to avoid $750,000 dollar losses. The SEC had to prove that Cuban received confidential, significant, nonpublic information which is the reason for him selling his stock. The SEC received this information through an eight-minute phone call recorded between Cuban and Mamma.com’s CEO.

During the phone call, the CEO stated he told Cuban confidentially that he was planning a stock offering called Private Investment in public equity. Cuban responded with, “Now I’m screwed. I can’t sell.” This was an indication the insider information and decided to sell anyway.

Cuban testified that there were many reasons he ditched the stock, and that he was never told to keep the information secret. In addition to that, the information wasn’t important in his decision and said the public had this information too, as shown in a website posting. This was basically one man’s word against the others.

Lastly, insider trading requires that a trader act on “material, nonpublic” information, meaning that this information must be significant as well. It wasn’t significant, as shown in a study by Dr. Erik Sirri, a former high-ranking official at the SEC.

Overall, if Cuban went to trial, he could have faced about a 2 million dollar fine, which was less than the amount he spent on lawyers to prove the SEC wrong.

Justin is a finance major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Connor Lynch. 

An article from The Wall Street Journal titled, “General Motors May Face Punitive Damages Over Ignition Switches” is a perfect example of short-run profit maximization versus long-run profit maximization. As of November 9, General Motors can face punitive damages in several lawsuits regarding defective ignition switches in millions of vehicles. Although those vehicles have all been recalled, the defective part has been linked to more than 100 deaths.

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Robert E. Gerber has linked GM to the deaths and injuries caused by the defective part in millions of their vehicles. After the case has been discussed, “Texas lawyer Robert Hilliard, who represents people suing GM for injuries and deaths tied to the defective ignition switch, called the decision ‘a major win’ for plaintiffs, contending that punitive damages are the only way to properly compensate victims who have been harmed by the defect.” Although it seems as if it was a complete loss for the defendant, a GM spokesperson said the company disputed the statement that the ruling was an utter victory for plaintiffs.

Punitive damages are damages intended to deter the defendants and others from getting involved in conduct that is similar to the actions that formed the basis of the lawsuit. Punitive damages are also used to punish corporations for wrongdoing such as selling defective products. Those defective products usually lead to death/injury which often can lead to large awards from the jury. It is unclear to what the punitive damages of this case will amount to: “Judge Gerber at one point in his ruling suggested GM’s punitive damages exposure could amount to millions, if not billions, of dollars, though any actual exposure will depend on whether legal claims against the company are settled or ultimately successful.”

This is not the first time that General Motors has been involved with a defective product recall resulting in punitive damages. Last year GM agreed to pay $35 million for failing to alert the public about the specific defect in a timely manner. Judge Gerber’s ruling stems from separating the “Old GM” and “New GM” because of the controversial belief that GM has retained liabilities pertaining to their restructuring.

“Old GM” had so many problems at one point that they were forced to restructure and become a new and reformed company. This has resulted in product-liability, “GM, as part of the bankruptcy restructuring, agreed to assume responsibility for future product-liability cases involving older vehicles, or those under the purview of Old GM.” General Motors’ reconstruction has allowed them to avoid several lawsuits because of their “bankruptcy shield.” Judge Gerber has ruled that “New GM” may be held responsible for the recent defective ignition switch that has caused over 100 deaths. Punitive damages may be sought out to the extent of new GM’s knowledge on the subject matter involving the defective ignition switch. Because of all the injuries/deaths, there are over 1,000 plaintiffs represented by Texas attorney, Mr. Hilliard. General Motors seems as if it is doomed to pay more money in punitive damages in addition to the $575 million they have paid recently to settle cases involving defective products.

Connor is an accounting/finance major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2018.

Posted by Justin Gandhi.

In current news, a Russian billionaire investor has decided to confront Morgan Stanely in court, due to insider trading practices. Insider trading is the illegal practice of trading on the stock exchange to one’s own advantage through having access to confidential information. This is illegal and unethical.

The Russian billionaire claims that Morgan Stanely illegally sold a company based on information in the peak of the financial crisis. The claim is that Morgan Stanely obtained it information through the company’s lender. Morgan Stanely’s trader immediately began short-selling the stock before the company would have to liquidate its stock and default. Morgan Stanely made 4.6 million dollars apposed to losing 6.6 million from the illegal information received.

Morgan Stanley claims it was simply hedging against exposure to risk. This trial is still in process. Be on the look out to hear more about the open arguments, defenses, and the final decision.

Justin is a finance major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Connor Lynch.

An article from The Wall Street Journal titled, “Toshiba Shares Fall After Loss, Lawsuits” involves an accounting scandal within the Toshiba Corporation. On Monday, Toshiba Corp. shares fell 7.5% after the company shocked the public with their poor financial results. Because of the decrease in share price, the Toshiba Corporation is suing their former executives that are in connection with an accounting scandal which may show prolonged legal uncertainties.

For the latest sixth month period, the technology giant Toshiba released statements that showed a $733 million loss. Investors were surprised by both the huge economic loss and the odd time period for releasing the financial statement. After showing a $1.12 billion dollar profit in the previous year, the publicly traded company is in an obvious state of distress. The corporation is not in a good state as of recently, “Equally unusual was Toshiba’s disclosure that it had sued three former presidents and two other executives, seeking to recover ¥300 million in connection with the scandal. Toshiba has said it overstated profits by ¥155 billion over seven years, prompting the resignation of then-CEO Hisao Tanaka in July.” In the lawsuits, the CEO and two other chief officers are said to have exhibited lax oversights on the financial statements of the company. This accounting scandal has led to several lawsuits that are reflecting poorly on the corporation for obvious reasons.

In July, Mr. Tanaka had released a statement apologizing for the problems but denies knowing about any inappropriate accounting. Because of the lawsuits involving shareholders, the stock price of Toshiba has reached its lowest level since 2012. The scandal is viewed as a disaster and many officials are speculative that Toshiba may have more skeletons in their closet. Toshiba is now viewed as a corporation with a negative outlook with businesses that seem unprofitable and need restructuring. As of now, it is unclear of Toshiba’s true position because of the accounting scandal effects on their financial reports.

The difficulty that Toshiba is experiencing as of late is causing them to consider reconstructing the corporation. Earnings are deteriorating and this is not good for Toshiba, “Sales plunged and losses swelled in the company’s consumer electronics business, and earnings fell sharply in its semiconductor arm, a leading maker of flash memory chips for smartphones and other gadgets. The chip business has been Toshiba’s main money maker in recent years.” Because of the decreasing sales in Toshiba’s business market, it causes the public to wonder if the previous financial success was based solely upon accounting tactics.

Connor is a finance and accounting major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2018.

Posted by Elizabeth Wang.

Did you know that all the Apple employees had to show their bag(s) to store security while entering and exiting to and from their stores? Even on their breaks, they have to go through security screening. Former employees, Amanda Frlekin and Dean Pelle, initiated a class action lawsuit against Apple. It included 12,000 past and present workers among 52 stores throughout California.

This past July, the lawsuit was granted class-action status in San Francisco by U.S. District Judge William Alsup. The lawsuit claims that “Apple’s policy was demeaning and embarrassing and made them feel like they were being treated as criminals.”(Williams). Also, employees lost time standing in line for the security surveillance.

These searches were not avoidable. Apple’s claimed that employees were advised to opt to come in to work without bags to avoid this activity, and “the searches were so quick, there’s no need to pay out” (Williams).

Although they claim they lost time going through this security check, Apple does not have a better solution for this issue. I guess it is a theft prevention because their devices are small and expensive. The judge had granted the filing but had dismissed the lawsuit for now.

Elizabeth is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2016.

Sources:

Judge bins Apple Store end-of-shift shakedown lawsuit^[1]

Apple Class Action Lawsuit Is Dismissed^[2]

Ex-Apple bods suing Apple for bag searches get class …^[3]

^[1] Fiveash, K (2015). Judge bins Apple Store end-of-shift shakedown lawsuit … Retrieved November 13, 2015, from http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/11/09/judge_dismisses_apple_store_shift_shakedown_lawsuit/.

^[2]Reuters (2015). Apple Class Action Lawsuit Is Dismissed – The New York … Retrieved November 13, 2015, from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/09/technology/apple-class-action-lawsuit-is-dismissed.html.

^[3]Williams, C (2015). Ex-Apple bods suing Apple for bag searches get class … Retrieved November 13, 2015, from http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/17/apple_store_class_action/.

Posted by Justin Gandhi.

This case is about allowing the citizens of Texas to use license plates on their vehicles that contained use of the Confederate Flag. This was an issue of free speech and freedom of expression in the First Amendment. The State of Texas wanted to reject the use of the Confederate flag license plates because these state license plates show what the Government endorses, for example a license plate featuring the universities of Texas.

Endorsing the Confederate Flag gives Texas a very bad image because it is offensive to many people, due to the war over slavery and how thousands of people were killed during this war. The Supreme Court believes that the Confederate flag associates itself with organizations advocating expressions of hate directed toward people or groups that is demeaning to those people or groups. This is offensive and obscene speech/expression, so Texas has every right to reject these license plates because it will make sure that people know that the Texas Government does not endorse this.

Overall, the Texas Government will not include a Confederate battle flag on its specialty license plates and will reject any license plates that do.

Justin is a finance major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Elizabeth Wang.

Wal-Mart settled a class action lawsuit in California. Wal-Mart’s ex-employees filed lawsuit  claiming wage law violations; they did not have the 30–minute lunch break, which is required for employees for working of at least six hours in the state. The plaintiffs collected $57M in compensatory damages and $115M in punitive damages, according to the Associated Press. A similar lawsuit against Walmart in Texas, Oregon, and Colorado yielded a $50M settlement.

In Pennsylvania, 150 workers had claimed that Wal-Mart was not paying for hours worked: “In one instance, one employee claimed 8 to 12 unpaid hours a month, on average.” Of course, Wal-Mart denied the allegations; their explanation is that they were testing a “flexible scheduling” policy, through the company called a shift rotation. Consequently, many full-time workers now are working in part-time schedules. This way, they claim that Wal-Mart is cutting its cost of salaries and do not have to pay employee benefits.

The lawyers of the Wal-Mart employees had to ask the court judge for an injunction from Wal-Mart to obey the legal lunch-break laws. Now, the company has to report this compliance for the next three years.

Wal-Mart has stores worldwide, mostly in United States, Canada, Argentina and Brazil. Today the company’s worth is $33.1 billion (Walmart^[1], Wikipedia, 2015). I was shocked to realize how many lawsuits were against this company. The salary of their employees are not sufficient, despite the company’s $285 billion in sales in 2015 in the U.S. Many of their full time employees had their working hours reduced to part time. I hope not only Wal-Mart but all business  can be a little more generous with their fortune profits and learn from these lawsuits.

Elizabeth is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2016.

Sources:

Walmart- Wikipedia

The Good, the Bad, and Wal-Mart^[1]

Wal-Mart Class Action Lawsuit^[2]

^[1] (2006). The Good, the Bad, and Wal-Mart – Wal-Mart. Retrieved November 13, 2015, from http://www.workplacefairness.org/reports/good-bad-wal-mart/wal-mart.php.

^[2] (2014). Wal-Mart Class Action Lawsuit | Wal-Mart Trucking Lawyers. Retrieved November 13, 2015, from http://www.wagnerjones.com/wal-mart-class-action-lawsuit/.

^[1] “Walmart – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.” 2011. 13 Nov. 2015