About Blog Business Law

Blog Business Law is an educational resource for Business Law students on the university level. Its purpose is to present current issues in business law and provide commentary and opinion. Both graduate and undergraduate students of Seton Hall University, Stillman School of Business, and Montclair State University, Feliciano School of Business post on a wide variety of topics. Some of the areas covered are contracts, business torts, white collar crime, cybercrime, and First Amendment law.

Professor Victor N. Metallo, MAE, MBA, MLIS, JD, teaches at Seton Hall University, Stillman School of Business, Department of Economics and Legal Studies, and Montclair State University, School of Business, Department of Accounting, Law and Taxation. He developed “Blog Business Law” to inspire students to be aware of the legal environment in business through researching current events and practice writing in a concise manner.

This blog/website is for educational purposes only to give the reader general information and not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the blog/website publisher(s). The blog/website should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state. This site is not affiliated with Seton Hall University or Montclair State University.

Posted by Ivanna Klics. There has been quite a ruckus at Wells Fargo as they made headlines for causing fraudulent transactions that have not been authorized by the customers themselves. Wells Fargo is being accused for creating banking and credit card accounts without the permission of its customers. Who are the customers more to blame then the […]

0 comments

Posted by Ola Mohammed Alghasham. The world encounters cases where frauds are committed by white collar criminals. Executives whom fight against fraud are beneficial for the company. Although the board and management make strong efforts in composing fraud preventing policies, there are several behavioral, environmental, and fraud assessment elements which are ignored during the composition […]

0 comments

Posted by Dylan Beland. One of the most talked about issues in business law news is the Wells Fargo scandal. The story behind this scandal is that the Department of Justice and many attorneys are investigating the possibility that Wells Fargo has millions of fake accounts opened at their banks. The result of the investigation was Wells […]

0 comments

Posted by Steven Otto. The San Francisco rating company, Yelp, is not found liable for negative reviews posted on its site. This is because it relies on ratings posted by users, not the company itself. A federal appeals court on Monday, September 12, dismissed a libel lawsuit filed against Yelp by Douglas Kimzey, the owner […]

0 comments

Posted by Abigail Hofmann. Francisco Garcia of the Sacramento Kings was lifting weights on a Ledraplastic exercise ball on October 9th, 2009. The 195 pound player was lifting two 80 pound weights while on the ball when it suddenly burst beneath him. This supposed “burst resistant” ball advertised its ability to withstand weight up to […]

0 comments

Student Posts Archives

Posted by Katie Kontos.

Years ago a YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7dLU6fk9QY) entitled Look Up went viral that urged the public to put down their phones and other technology to pay attention to the world around them. The most moving line says, “So look up from your phone, shut down the display take in your surroundings make the most of today.”

Well DeToya Moody, a 30 year old woman from Georgia, has proved in her court case against Allison Escott that it is possible to benefit from keeping your phone in front of your face. Moody claims that she never saw the orange ladder of a bucket truck prior to smacking her head on it one sunny afternoon. The ladder had been raised across a public sidewalk and surrounded by orange cones the first three times Moody passed it. Seeming to be a completely safe path to walk, the woman made it from her car to the store, back to her car, and then to the ATM without a problem. However, upon walking back to her car from the ATM, Moody, staring intently at her cell phone, did not see that the worker operating the truck had lowered the ladder and proceeded to walk directly into it. The physician who examined her after the incident diagnosed her with a mild head concussion, post-traumatic headaches, and an indentation on her head from the contact.

Moody and her lawyer attempted to settle out of court with the company owner of the truck and the worker operating the truck during the accident, but with the company offering to settle for $5,000 after being asked $75,000, it went to trial. So, after going to court the DeKalb County jury determined that Moody would be awarded $161,000. This is a great example of why many cases are settled by mediation or arbitration, because there is no way of knowing what a jury will decide when a suit is brought to court. The award could have been $175,000 but the jury deemed that the accident was eight percent Moody’s fault so they gave her 92% of the award.

Again, this is a perfect example of why most cases never go to trial. In court, Moody’s lawyer only asked the jury for $155,000 but they decided that the compensatory damages should be more than that.

After the trial “Robert Finlayson II of Mozley, Finlayson & Loggins, who defended the company that was using the truck said via email that he would contest the verdict.‘We were disappointed with the verdict, and we do plan to challenge it at the trial level and on appeal,’ said Finlayson, who described the case as well tried on both sides.”

I think that the monetary value awarded to Moody should, as it did, cover any medical expenses, but the plaintiff was right when he noted that the defense against Moody, that she wasn’t paying attention, was “the common sense argument,” and therefore, awarding her $161,000 is outrageous. This woman was clearly not paying attention and there is video evidence “showing the woman engrossed in her cellphone as she struck the ladder and collapsed onto the concrete.”

All in all, this trial just goes to prove that you never know what will happen when you take a case to court, and while it probably rarely works out this way, sometimes having your eyes glued to your phone helps you win $161,000.

Katie is a social and behavioral science major, minor in business and psychology, at Seton Hall University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Luke Iorio.

It was deemed the trial of the century–a trial with so many twist and turns it has sparked books to be written about it as well as a TV mini series. It is the O.J. trial, and there was a recent discovery that could finally provide all the answers.

The one thing missing from the prosecutor’s case was the murder weapon. There is a chance that the weapon has been discovered 22 years after the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. A retired policeman has handed in a knife that was found by a construction worker in 1998 on Simpson’s property.  The knife is currently being tested for DNA.

There is still skepticism, amongst many people, that this knife will end up having anything to do with the murders. It is a little suspicious that this knife suddenly appears in the middle of the airing of the mini series that is based on the murders and trial.

The main question to be asked is: what happens if the knife is connected to the murder and the DNA comes back connected to OJ? Because of double jeopardy in the Fifth Amendment, OJ will be safe from being back on trial. Unless the trial goes to a federal court, the only problem is that there is a slim chance that a federal issue could possibly arise from a murder case.

The people that have a chance to face legal punishment if the knife is linked to OJ Simpson are the people that helped keep the knife hidden or, if his friends helped conceal any evidence. Those are the people that could end up going to jail not OJ.

It is important to conclude saying that it is very unlikely that the knife has any connection to the murders and it is just one of the hundred “murder weapons” that have been turned in over the years. But it is something to think about.

Luke is a sports management and finance major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2018.

Posted by Tejas Oza.

Disney has made a change on how they accommodate children with disabilities. First, there was a Guest Assistance Card (GAC) which let the children with disabilities first in line. Now they changed the policy to that children have to wait to a specific time to go on each ride. “I have known many autistic children,” says Arias, “They tend to be excited very easily. When they go to Disney World, it is a major highlight in their lives. You can’t tell an autistic child to come back in an hour – because once they see the ride – they are ready to go. The way their minds are structured they just cannot handle being told to come back later.”(Craig https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com).

This causes stress for these children, which is very unjust, but stress is not the only outcome to this situation; other possibilities include, anxiety and meltdown behaviors. Disney disagrees with this and believes that the case has “no merit,” which means that Disney believes there is no proof.

This suit interested me because it included high damages, which we recently went over in class. This case is interesting because not only does it help Disney in financial situations but also in more of a family setting because the amount of kids that goes to the amusement park will rise very fast.

“According to a Centers for Disease Control press release on March 27, 2014, as of 2010, one out of every 68 American children is considered autistic.”( Craig https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com)  I learned a lot from researching this case.

Tejas is a marketing major at Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University.

Posted by Alexander Sayour.

Retirement is a thought that many hardworking Americans seek towards saving up for during the latter years in life. Barring some rare instances, the path to retirement involves saving up enough money to live comfortably which has grown to be much harder in today’s times. A common way of doing so has been to invest for retirement with the help of financial professionals with either simply individual accounts or with 401k’s. There has always been much discussion over how these professionals invest retirees money and finally the Labor Department has stepped in to clear up any grey areas. This action by the government will shift the emphasis of retirement funds into lower-cost investments.

“The marketing material that I see from many firms is ‘We put our customers first’” Thomas E. Perez, the Security of Labor, said in an interview. “This is no longer a marketing slogan. It’s the law.”

These new effects won’t take effect until at least next spring and may be challenged in court, but it is definitely at least an attempt at tackling this ongoing debate of money management. This is not to say that financial professionals are doing anything wrong; it is just to prevent the chances of there being more self-driven choices in investing. For example, professionals are required to recommend only suitable investments but they may influence a more expensive mutual fund that would pay them much higher commission. The Obama Administration tackled this notion with extensive academic research estimating the conflict of interest cost Americans about $17 billion last year which led to annual returns that are 1% lower. An important part of going after the conflict of interest is that it could impact the financial industry as a whole and accentuate compliance to the rules put forth by the government.

The only problem with this new obligation is that it could impact investors greatly, especially considering commissions would be limited with a push to flat annual fees for managing accounts. Jules Gaudreau, the president of the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors, was pleased with some of the changes but has some fears about them as well. She said “We remain concerned that the costs to implement such a rule will result in higher costs and reduced access to advice, service, and products for retirement savers.”

Investors will be protected when rolling over a 401k to an IRA because it is just considered one-time advice given, in addition to performance disclosures not being mandated because it is hard to justify projections being made. All in all, there was $7.3 trillion in individual retirement accounts and $6.7 trillion held in 401k plans at the end of 2015, according to the Investment Company Institute, so this is definitely a monumental issue that is going to take time to address and tweak over several years if not decades.

Alexander is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Alexander Sayour.

Mergers are very common for both small and large companies. New York based company Pfizer just attempted merging with Allergan because of the incentive of moving corporate headquarters to Ireland, which in return could reduce its tax bill. This would’ve been a $150 billion merger, the second largest in history, except Obama called it off due to a new crack down from the administration on corporate tax avoidance. The attempted takeover was an example of an inversion which is in simple terms a U.S. Multinational merging with a foreign company to change its legal tax residence for lower rates. Because of these new rules for cracking down on this. many expected the merger would not go through.

Pfizer has said since being denied from merging they would look at other methods to boost their share prices. An example listed being separating the company up which will be decided on by the end. Obama went on to discuss the problem with these loopholes claiming that the laws are poorly designed. Additionally he goes on to say that loopholes “Come at the expense of middle class families because that lost revenue has to be made up somewhere. It means that we’re not investing as much as we should in schools, in making college more affordable, in putting people back to work, in rebuilding our roads, our bridges, our infrastructure, creating more opportunities for our children.”

Loopholes are definitely a pivotal issue at hand for our country and during our presidential debates–something that we are finally addressing now.

Alexander is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Andrew Nguyen.

Uber is one of the most popular apps that are around today. This application allows users to call upon a driver to take them to a destination of their choice. Uber has become a widely-used application that proves to be beneficial. However, the company is facing a lawsuit regarding their price surges. It was said that CEO Travis Kalanick faces the lawsuit that alleges that he conspired with Uber drivers to increase prices for more profit. The case is Meyer vs Kalanick. Due to the quick growing popularity of the app, the price surged. The suit alleged that the Uber drivers conspired with CEO Travis Kalanick to rig the prices for the rides.

When a user is in a popular area, the price increases due to the amount of users that are around who also want to use the app. This conspiracy was looked on to after New Year’s Eve when the prices went up to $200. The high-price surge had customers outraged by the unrealistic cost for a ride. The company appears to take advantage of how desperate users need to get a driver. By increasing their prices, users have no choice but to either accept it or find an alternative.

In the scheme of things, Uber has done nothing wrong. Sure the prices may be outrageous at times, but that’s how a business is, supply and demand. Uber drivers are independent contractors who make money off of how much they make from driving. Although the prices may be higher than expected sometimes, users are not forced to use the app. The app is available for the convenience of users. No wrong has been done regarding this company. It is tough making a living and Uber is trying to make a statement that their company is an asset to the users.

There are many alternative ways of getting to a destination. However, Uber is probably one of the most convenient ways. What people pay for their Uber ride is not by force. It is a decision that they have to make whether they want to or not. Uber gives an estimated fare price before calling for one, so users typically have an idea on how much they are paying.

Andrew is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Andrew Nguyen.

One of the latest lawsuits involve Hulk Hogan and a media organization named Gawker. Hulk Hogan is one of the most iconic faces in wrestling entertainment. The lawsuit is about how Gawker released a sex tape of Hulk Hogan and a woman without his knowledge of the tape. Hulk Hogan claimed that he had no knowledge that he was being recorded and what happened was an invasion of his privacy.

Gawker claimed that Hulk Hogan is emotionally and mentally unstable due to his career and marriage falling apart. Also, the recent incident of the case of Hulk Hogan’s alleged racist act during his career in the WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment) did not work in his favor either. Gawker is claiming that the lawsuit was not about the sex tape at all, but the downfall of Hulk Hogan’s career.

No matter what the reason is, the tape was recorded without the consent of either party. The privacy of Hulk Hogan was violated and he should be compensated for that. Although his reputation is not the best, the release of the sex tape did not make things better. We all have our good days and our bad. Hulk Hogan is human like the rest of us. We all make mistakes and sometimes those mistakes can’t be fixed. However, one’s privacy should not be able to get released to the world.

Hulk Hogan does have the right to sue in my opinion. The recording occurred without his knowledge and that is a big invasion of privacy. Looking at it if the roles were to be reversed, no one would want that to happen to them. Something like that should not be released to the public where people and potentially friends and family can see it.

Andrew is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Pooja Patel.

The Federal Trade Commission charged a technology company, Vulcun, for installation issues with the game,“Running Fred,” and for unfairly taking-over consumers phones and installing apps on their phones without their permission.  “Running Fred” is a Google Chrome application that runs on Android phones. This game has become quite popular, and  is used by more than 200,000 consumers.

The two founders of Vulcun, Ali Moiz and Murtaza Hussein, purchased the game. They replaced the name of that app to “Weekly Android Apps” and made several changes. Through the changes, the two founders were able to attack consumers with ads. The FTC states that ““Because the Weekly Android Apps hid and accepted the default Android permissions request, these mobile apps could have gained immediate access to the user’s address book, photos, location, and persistent device identifiers. In addition, once installed, the apps could have gained access to other information, including financial and health information, by executing additional malicious code on the consumer’s mobile device.” Because of this, many people complained about not having privacy on their phone, and also “that the browser extension was opening multiple tabs and windows on their browser advertising various apps.”  The company’s actions seems to be an invasion of privacy.

Vulcun finally agreed to stop these unfair acts.  Now, the company is required to tell consumers about the types of information their products will accessed, how it will be used, and display any built-in permission notices associated with the installation of the app advertisement service. Vulcun also has no rights to hide from consumers whether their product have been endorsed by third parties.

Pooja is an accounting and finance major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Pooja Patel.

The Federal Trade Commission sued Volkswagen for advertising a false claim that their vehicles are environmental friendly and “clean diesel.” Volkswagen is a German manufactured car company. The vehicles that are being affected with this law suit are 2009 through 2015 Volkswagen TDI diesel models of Jetta’s, Passat’s, and Touareg SUVs, also the TDI Audi models. The sale price for these affected vehicles ranges from the least expensive $22,000 Volkswagen to the most expensive $125,000 Audi model. Volkswagen advertised its “clean diesel” vehicles through major advertisement such as Super Bowl Ads, print ads, and of course social media advertisement.

Volkswagen claims their cars are “low-emission, environmentally friendly” and  “met emissions standards and would maintain a high resale value.” These claims are alleged to be false. Volkswagen claimed that their cars had low emission and it is “clean diesel.” This means the vehicle would produce low Nitrogen Oxide by 90 percent or less. Instead, the FTC complaint states that the vehicle produces up to 4,000 percent more that the legal limit. This is harmful and dangerous to the customers, since it can cause health problems as well as environmental problems. Also, Volkswagen claimed that they met the emission standards and also would maintain a high resale value, but these claims were also false. According to the FTC, Volkswagen has installed illegal software that helped it pass emission standards.

The chairwoman of FTC, Edith Ramirez, stated that “Our lawsuit seeks compensation for the consumers who bought affected cars based on Volkswagen’s deceptive and unfair practices.” Volkswagen is also looking at a potential of $20 billion-dollar fine for violating the clean air regulations. The lawsuit is still yet to be settled therefore; exact fines are not yet confirmed. But Volkswagen’s spokeswoman, Jeannine Ginivan, responded to this issue and said, “Our most important priority is to find a solution to the diesel emissions matter and earn back the trust of our customers and dealers as we build a better company.”

In my opinion, the actions Volkswagen took were definitely unethical; they were more concerned about gaining profits. They also put consumers’ lives at risk. I think the Federal Trade Commission did the right thing by suing the Volkswagen company.

Pooja is an accounting and finance major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Michael DeCandia.

Chipotle is a fast food industry that has been a growing corporation, which serves high quality food for a cheap price. Almost everyone knew about the “Crisis of Chipotle.”

The E. Coli incident was first noticed in Washington and Oregon. The E. Coli started to spread to other Chipotle’s across the nation. It only took a couple of week for the bacteria to find its way to the east coast. In the article, There’s a Crisis at Chipotle states “Boston health officials said the cause was norovirus, a common virus, while citing the restaurant for two health violations: improper handling of poultry and the presence of a sick employee (Ferdmand, Bhattarai).”  This is a serious issue for many companies and is a challenge that Chipotle has to and will overcome.

Chipotle will rise up again. A Chipotle store closing is a sad thing to watch when you know that almost every person you know loves the food. I do not think Chipotle should be scared about losing their customers even though this outbreak happened. Mistakes are always made, which is what make us human. Even though Chipotle’s stock went down thirty percent they will overcome this issue.  Learning from our mistakes and having it never happen again is failing forward and not backward.

In the article, There’s a Crisis at Chipotle, Chad Molly states, “There is no way we’re even considering going in there today. It’s company wide, all over the country, which means it’s a problem (Ferdmand, Bhattarai).” I believe a company should deserve a second chance in most circumstances. Many people still go to Chipotle because they have never had a bad experience, so they continue to go to a place that is relativity cheap for good food that people enjoy, like myself.

Chipotle is going beyond the requirements, so that this incident will never happen again.

Michael is a marketing major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2018.

New Jersey Archives

Posted by Rizzlyn Melo.

The car-manufacturing company, Tesla, has been battling with New Jersey government officials for the right to sell their premium electric cars in the state. Tesla differs from other car-manufacturers because they sell their vehicles directly from small, independently-owned sites instead of large dealerships. Many of Tesla’s facilities are actually located in various malls in New Jersey. The issue with this practice is that under New Jersey law, cars can only be sold through registered dealerships. In the article, this legislation “was put into place at a time when small local dealers were perceived as vulnerable to the moves of major national manufacturers.” Because of Tesla, this law has been targeted and challenged by various carmakers and consumer-rights groups. Fortunately, it can be said that their efforts have not gone in vain. In March, Governor Chris Christie signed new legislation that allows Tesla to operate at four sites in New Jersey. Shortly after this was signed, New Jersey lawmakers approved an amendment granting zero emission car manufacturers the right to operate dealerships in the state.

Tesla’s success story in New Jersey shows that the market is modernizing. Legislation that was once effective in the past can actually be disadvantageous in the present day. While the law requiring sales through registered dealerships was once helpful to small businesses, it prevented a company from potentially helping the environment. Tesla only produces zero-emission, luxury cars. They are a company seeking to reduce society’s carbon footprint by introducing a sleek, fashionable car to the market that does not require gas. The government’s initial refusal to allow this company to conduct its business in New Jersey made legislators look like they would sacrifice an environmental advancement for the sake of large dealerships. Tesla’s win in New Jersey represents more than the right to sell cars; it is a win for the evolving market that is in need of environmentally friendly products.

Rizzlyn is a business administration major with a concentration in marketing at Montclair State University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Briana Brandao.

This article, written by MaryAnn Spoto, brings to question whether or not Rutgers University violated the New Jersey open public meetings law, during one of their meetings held back in September of 2008. Francis McGovern Jr, a lawyer as well as audience member of this meeting, objected to the way these meetings were promoted and handled. McGovern noted that audience members waited over four hours while board members discussed issues behind closed doors. Once the board of governors finally reassembled, many audience members had grown tired of waiting and already left.

McGovern also noted that the Rutgers board of governors failed to mention topics discussed behind closed doors such as talk of Rutgers new football stadium. She stated, “This case is about governmental transparency,” and believes these long and tedious closed sessions dissuade public attendance. During her case, she asked that the court make it mandatory for Rutgers to hold public meetings first. She believed that by not bringing to light all issues discussed among Board of Governors, that Rutgers violated the law.

Although many may argue that McGovern had reason behind her case, the Supreme Court still ruled that Rutgers University was in compliance with the law. The court did not believe that Rutgers conducted their meetings in a way that discouraged public attendance. The court also stated that Rutgers Board of Governors did not violate the open public meetings law.

However, the court did agree that lawmakers should in fact look into tightening the law. Discussion of tightening this law would allow citizens the opportunity to challenge public organizations trying to get around the law. All in all, Rutgers University was pleased with the court’s decision.

Briana is a business administration major with a concentration in management and fashion studies at Montclair State University, Class of 2016.

Cell phone video capability is commonplace now, and police in New Jersey are getting used to it. Experts claim that under the First Amendment recording police in plain view is protected. A police officer may not seize a cell phone, delete anything on it, or even demand that the person turn it over to him without a warrant. As long as the person is not truly interfering with a police investigation, they can record as much as they want.

Robert W. Fox, president of the New Jersey State Fraternal Order of Police, stated police should face the fact that cell phone cameras are a reality.  “‘We tell our officers out there . . . that, anything they do, consider themselves being filmed,’” Fox said. “‘No matter where you are anymore, there is some sort of video on the incident – whether it comes from a building camera or an individual cellphone or things like that.’” Arguably, the videos not only protect citizens but also the police from being falsely accused. For most police, video recording should not matter, because they are doing things by the book anyway.

It should be noted that cell phone videos may not capture everything that is taking place during a police encounter. Therefore, rushing to judgment against police would be unfair.

It is now legal for Tesla and other manufacturers of zero-emission cars to sell directly to customers in New Jersey. Tesla’s business model includes selling its battery-driven cars from its boutique stores. One of them is located in Short Hills Mall, Short Hills, NJ.

Customers are free to learn about the vehicles through interactive displays and test drives. Tesla does not want to sell its cars through franchises because they sell mostly gas-powered vehicles. Since most of their revenue comes from gas-powered sales, franchises would not be encouraged to sell zero-emission cars.

Posted by Sam Battista.

I came across this article recently about these topics that were brought up in class, and I thought it was appropriate to write a blog pertaining to this article. Seven reputable members of the Geneovese crime family were recently arrested on accounts of money laundering and racketeering. The group allegedly raked in millions of dollars through the Garden State by gambling, loansharking, and unlicensed check cashing. Most of these charges fall under the RICO laws because this is organized crime.

The group ran a massive loansharking operation, which generated about 1.3 million dollars in interest a year. It operated an offshore Costa Rica Gambling website and an unlicensed check cashing business, making over nine million in fees over a four year run. The group also laundered $660,000 dollars in drug money out of a Florida based check cashing entity. The group also gave out multimillion dollar loans with interest rates upwards of 156 percent. In addition, the group ran a illegal check cashing business out of a restaurant in Newark that cashed-in over 400 million dollars.

All of these violations are prohibited in the RICO laws and are considered organized crime. Most of the acts committed were covered or ran out of legitimate businesses. These individuals were all from New Jersey and are currently being prosecuted for their federal violations. People often think these type of crimes only happen in movies, but the truth is it’s a multimillion dollar business with violations happening everyday.

Sam is a business administration major with a concentration in real estate at Montclair State University, Class of 2016.

December 2015

Posted by Catherine Caldwell.

The trendy new and convenient company, Uber Technologies Inc., is currently enduring a legal battle for its illegal classification of freelancers. Uber was founded in 2009, as an application that acts as an electronic link from individuals who have cars to individuals who needs rides. The company has received a reputation of convenience to its customers and an easy way to make profit for its drivers. However, attorney Shannon Liss-Riordan, a powerful attorney in the state of California, disagrees with the classification of Uber drivers.

Shannon Liss-Riordan is no stranger in her attack on large billion dollar industries such as Uber. She has made cases against Starbucks, Harvard University and FedEx, to name a few. Ms. Liss-Riordan thinks that Uber drivers are unlawfully “on-demand workers” with no benefits. Instead of freelancers, Uber drivers should receive employee status, which would include drivers receiving reimbursement of their transportation expenses among other employment protective benefits.

As a software intermediary in the transportation business, Uber Technologies Inc. claims that they do not need grounds for titling their drivers as employees. Uber does not have a “fleet of drivers” waiting to pick up the next customer, but is based on convenience for both the drivers and employees. Uber does not plan on settling the case and has begun their approach by assembling 400 statements from drivers saying they were content with the flexible labor opportunities. However, in retaliation, Liss-Riordan took 50 of those statements and found that those drivers stated they would like to have official employment status.

In September, the case won class action status in San Francisco and will continue in federal court. Valued at $51 billion and is willing to fight for their case all the way to the Supreme Court and are unwilling to settle.

This case will create a precedent in the industry of software application employment services, and therefore needs to be handled very tactically. The basic labor protection laws should not be ignored due to new forms of introducing a business such as Uber. However, each Uber driver participates to make profits on their own agenda. Some use the service for extra cash, where others, in the grueling unemployment climate, use Uber as full time opportunities. In my opinion, the court should require Uber to create employment contracts with Uber drivers who can prove that it is a major source of income.

Catherine is a finance and information technology major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2018.

Posted by Carter McIntosh.

On November 5th, 2015, the Department of Justice announced that Wells Fargo failed to notify bankrupt homeowners of mortgage payment increases. Wells Fargo was required to pay out $81.6 million to “homeowners after reaching a settlement with the Department of Justice’s U.S. Trustee Program over the banks ‘repeated failures’ to provide Bankrupt homeowners with legally required notices of mortgage payment increases.” The Federal Bankruptcy Rule 3002.1 requires mortgage creditors (Wells Fargo) to file and serve a notice 21 days before adjusting a Chapter 13 debtor’s monthly mortgage payment.

The failure that sparked Wells Fargo’s fine was the fact that in Chapter 13 bankruptcy cases they did not file and serve the mortgage lenders with a notice 21 days before Wells Fargo adjusted the monthly mortgage payment. In fact, when the DOJ pursued this case, “Wells Fargo acknowledged that it failed to timely file more than 100,000 payment change notices and failed to timely perform more than 18,000 escrow analyses in cases involving nearly 68,000 accounts of homeowners in bankruptcy between Dec. 1, 2011 and March 31, 2015.”

The $81.6 million settlement that Wells Fargo agreed to pay to the homeowners within the time period listed above is made to several different groups of borrowers. The first group, which consists of $53.6 million of the $81.6 million, will go to “more than 42,000 homeowners whose payments increased as to which Wells Fargo failed to timely file a PNC with the court, each homeowner will receive on average $1,254.”

The next group, which consists of $10 million, will go to “crediting homeowners’ accounts at the end of their Bankruptcy cases.” The third group, which consist of $1.5 million, will go to “refunding in cash about 3,000 homeowners where notices of decreases in monthly payments were not timely provided and the homeowners paid more than the actual amount.” The fourth group consists of $1 million and will go to “refunding in cash to about 2,400 homeowners who satisfied escrow shortages by making a lump sum payment.” The fifth group consists of $4.5 million and will go to “crediting mortgage escrow accounts of about 6,000 homeowners who did not receive timely escrow statements.”

The sixth group, which consists of $4 million, will go to “paying about 12,000 homeowners by crediting mortgage accounts where Wells Fargo failed to timely perform an escrow analysis.” The seventh group, which consists of $4 million, will go to “refunding in cash about 6,000 homeowners who did not receive timely escrow statements.” The eighth and final group, which consists of $3 million, will go to “remediation to about 8,000 homeowners which has already been completed.”

According to Director Cliff White of the U.S. Trustee Program, he is “pleased that Wells Fargo has acted responsibly by accepting accountability for its deficient bankruptcy practices, agreed to compensate affected homeowners for those deficiencies and committed to making necessary improvements in its Bankruptcy operations.”

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

Posted by Carter McIntosh.

Valeant is a very large pharmaceutical company that focused on creating a “drug giant that was focused on distribution.” Valeant “was” one of the hottest stocks on Wall Street; this stock was booming; the stock soared all the way to $260 in just months. Wall Street analysts and Hedge Funds loved Valeant and everyone wanted to own it. Valeant has been in the news lately, and it is not good news but rather some very bad news. Allegations now follow Valeant and whether or not they have true success or that there true success can be attributed to “price gouging: a secret network of specialty pharmacies; and fraud.” With these allegations surfacing, Valeant stock has “plummeted 60% in the last three months.”

Valeant has been under scrutiny for a while now, dating all the way back to August 14th, 2015. In August, Valeant was being scrutinized because they raised the price of their drugs. On October 5th, 2015, a study by a Deutsche Bank analyst finds that it is not just two drugs that they raised the prices. The report concludes that Valeant has jacked up prices on 54 other meds this year alone, by an average of 66%.” In response to this issue, Valeant CEO Pearson said during an earnings call on October 19th, 2015, that “Valeant will ease up on its strategy of buying up drugs that are mispriced and hiking the prices.”

On October 20th, 2015 “A report by Citron Research, run by activist short seller Andrew Left reveals more information about Philidor and it’s network of phantom captive pharmacies.” Left accused Valeant of committing accounting fraud; furthermore, Left compared “Valeant to companies like Enron.” Two days later on October 22nd, 2015, Valeant “called Left’s reports erroneous. The company says it hasn’t used Philidor to book false sales. It says Philidor is a separate company, but that Philidor’s financial statements are included in Valeant’s financial statements.” With this allegation surfacing Valeant shares have plummeted 30% in just three days.

As more and more information surfaced about Valeant’s relationship with Philidor, on October 30th, 2015, “Valeant says it is cutting ties to Philidor, and that the pharmacy will shut down immediately. Allegations have emerged that Philidor may have changed prescriptions to push Valeant’s high-priced drugs on patients, rather than the generics.” Bill Ackman, the largest shareholder in Valeant held a “four – hour conference call to defend Valeant,” as he believes in Valeant’s business strategy and that the company would not commit accounting fraud and price gouging. Unfortunately, this course of action did not help Valiant. In fact, after the Bill Ackman conference call, Valeant shares fell another 10%.

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

Posted by Charles Batikha.

Ransomware is similar to a Trojan horse. Imagine receiving an email from a non-familiar email address. The email claims to be the IRS claiming you are being sued for tax evasion and instructed to click on a link to a website. You are skeptical, but what is the worst thing that could happen if you click on the link. Malware was the virus used when ransomware was first introduced, but more recently website URL and deceptive pop-ups are being utilized. Home computers are not the only victims, business and even government systems have been breached as well.

Upon clicking on the link your browser becomes frozen, unable to use your computer a message pops onto the screen informing you of the encryption of your computer. This renders it useless and a fee is charged for the encryption key, which will cost anywhere from $200 to $5000. This is the newest “variant” called Crypto-Wall or Crypto-Wall 2.0. Interestingly enough, the scammers instruct victims to purchase bitcoins to be used for payment. Bitcoins have become much more popular among criminals because of the concealment of their identity.

Ransomware has also begun to hit smartphones, locking them as well. I personally have fallen victim to this type of ransomware. A message popped up stating that I must contact Apple to unfreeze my phone, but every time I closed the pop-up the notification would come up again not allowing me to use my internet. I called the phone number on the message, and I noticed that the phone line was a Google number, which made me a little suspicious. Immediately after someone answered the phone, they gave me a scripted explanation of how my system was locked and I need to give them my credit card number for a fee for them to unlock my phone. Fortunately enough, I did not pay the fee and hung up on the pleading receptionist.

A way I have found to refresh your phone from ransomware is to clear your website data in the setting of your phone. This has given me the use of my internet after being hit with ransomware. Updated anti-virus software on your computer is another preventative tactic. Using a pop-up blocker and not fumbling with unsolicited emails are other great tips as well.

Charles is a graduate accounting student with a certificate in forensic accounting at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University.

Posted by Charles Batikha.

Tamira Fonville was a Mesa Airlines employee and part time recruiter for a hair show, but these were both false lives that Fonville was leading. Fonville spent her time along the east coast from New York to Washington D.C. trying to lure women to expose their financial information by fraudulently posing as a hair show recruiter wanting to hire young women. Unfortunately, there was no show and Fonville was not a recruiter, nor an airline employee. By the end, she caught herself in an addiction she could not stop, between signing off bouncing checks and scamming women; she was bound to get caught.

Ricardo Falana was Fonville’s assistant.  Before the banks would know what was happening, they both would wipe accounts clean. Foneville would ask the girls for their bank account information, lying, saying she wanted to deposit checks into their account. Once the checks were deposited, the account would be emptied before the banks could be any wiser. For individuals that were too smart to be scammed, Tamira would offer them a piece of the pie. These individuals were even “coached” to lie to bank employees, telling them their credit cards had been stolen. The problem was the piece of the pie that they were waiting for never came. After some time, these women came forward as victims.

Young women were not the only ones that Fonville scammed. She applied for a car loan under the impression of being an employee of Mesa Airlines with a $65,000 salary. Tamira used $30,000 to pay for her Chevy Camero, plastic surgery and her New York apartment. While she was living this lavish life, Fonville also was living off food stamps, while having her student loans, totaling up to $100,000, deferred.

Tamira was arrested in August 2014, said to have profited over $200,000 from the scams. She was sentenced 15 months for conspiracy to commit bank fraud as well as 3 cases of bank fraud. Falana, Tamira’s assistant, was sentenced to 80 months after pleading guilty to similar bank fraud charges.

Charles is a graduate accounting student with a certificate in forensic accounting at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University.

Posted by Daniel Perez.

In “Accountants Increasingly Use Data Analysis to Catch Fraud,” Jo Craven McGinty highlights the rise in the use of mathematical and forensic procedures in the today’s audit industry. Americans are burdened with an estimated $300 billion a year due to employee fraud in the workplace. In the aftermath of large-scale fraud cases, such as Enron and WorldCom, audit firms are increasingly using more reliable audit procedures in their engagements to prevent such fraud cases from occurring again. Benford’s Law is the center focus of this article as it supports how similar procedures drives audit quality in the right direction.

In investigating refunds issued by a call center, a group of forensic accountants used Benford’s Law to detect employee fraud. Instead of traditional sampling used by auditors, the group of forensic accountants used Benford’s Law because it offers mathematical evidence that fraud may or may not be occurring: “According to Benford’s Law—named for a Depression-era physicist who calculated the expected frequency of digits in lists of numbers—more numbers start with one than any other digit, followed by those that begin with two, then three and so on.” In their testing of the refund amounts, the accountants expected to see a significant amount of refunds starting with “1,” followed by “2” and so on. The occurrence of refunds beginning with “4” were much more prevalent than it should have been according to Benford’s Law, raising the flag that fraud may be occurring. Applying similar procedures to Benford’s Law in the foundation of audits may grow to be a normal practice at some point in the future.

An application of the procedure to Enron’s financial statements portrays a clear variation from the normal results from Benford’s Law. McGinty’s article states that as computer programs, such as ACL, featuring forensic accounting procedures grow rampant in the marketplace, the use of these procedures does have a positive impact on future.

Article:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/accountants-increasingly-use-data-analysis-to-catch-fraud-1417804886

Daniel is a graduate accounting student at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2016.

Posted by Daphine Llosa.

The current legal issue relates to conspiracy and breach. A conspiracy is an agreement by two or more parties to commit a crime to do something unlawful or harmful. A breach is an act of breaking or failing to observe a law or agreement. On Tuesday, November 17, 2015, Crystal Banuelos pleaded guilty of a conspiracy to attain personal information and commit cards theft from Michaels Companies Incorporated’s customers. Michaels is an arts and crafts, custom framing, home décor and seasonal products store. Prior to this case, there was another prosecution where Eduard Arakelyan (age of 24) and Arman Vardanyan (age of 26) were charged for being involved in a breach. This breach was discovered in 2011 where devices were installed on point-of-sale terminals so they may obtain Michaels’ customers’ personal information as well as bank account numbers. Both individuals pleaded guilty three years ago for stealing from 952 debit cards; they were sentenced for five years of prison.

Crystal Banuelos, the 28 year old California woman, had participated in a conspiracy to acquire 94,000 credit and debit card numbers. It took Banuelos around four months to admit to her charges and plead guilty in the federal court in Camden, New Jersey. CNBC mentioned that the prosecutors found that the individuals involved in the conspiracy had replaced close to 90 of the point-of-sale terminals in 80 different Michaels stores in “19 states with counterfeit devices that were equipped with wireless technology.” They used these counterfeit devices to acquire customers’ personal identification number information as well as any additional information that they may have found useful for their theft. Crystal Banuelos, along with others, had managed to create an exact imitation of these debit cards using the stolen information they gathered when they applied the counterfeit devices. They were able to obtain and collect more than $420,000 by withdrawing from automated teller machines. Two of the defendants, Angel Angulo and Crystal Banuelos, had 179 of these imitated cards in New Jersey. Some of the banks that were affected include: Bank of America Corp, JPMorgan Chase & Co, Wells Fargo & Co, etc. It has been announced that Crystal Banuelo’s sentence is scheduled to be on February 23, 2016.

Daphne is a graduate accounting with a certification in forensic accounting at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2016.

Posted by Daphine Llosa.

A recent legal issue involves money laundering, embezzlement and fraud. Money laundering is a form of obtaining money illegally, usually by using transfers between banks and businesses. Embezzlement is theft or misappropriation of funds. Fraud is a wrongful deception for the purpose of attaining financial or personal gain.  On Friday, October 23, 2015 the New Mexico Republican Secretary of State, Dianna Duran, plead guilty of fraud. The state attorney general, Democrat Hector Balderas, filed 65 charges against Ms. Duran in August 2015 which included; fraud, embezzlement, money laundering and campaign finance violations. Investigations revealed that she used about $13,000 of the donations from her campaign to clear gambling debt around the state and to cover other personal matters. In order to hide the transfers to personal accounts, Ms. Duran altered the campaign finance reports. Ms. Duran had a hearing with her defense lawyer, Erlinda Johnson, and after refusing multiple times from leaving office she resigned. According to the New York Times, in hopes that she can receive five years of probation and get spared prison time, Ms. Duran pled guilty to six out of the sixty-five charges; four misdemeanors and two felonies. She stated that for her best interests, her loved ones and for all of New Mexico’s residents; she will be seeking for professional help due to her non-ethical and corrupt actions.

It had been a little over 80 years since New Mexico had a Republican serve as secretary of state. She ranked as the second highest elected official in New Mexico, where she served as state senator prior to becoming the 24th Secretary of State. Susana Martinez, Governor of New Mexico, received the resignation letter provided by Ms. Duran, which stated; ‘Although I may be leaving office, I shall always reflect upon the last 36 years of service, honored to work with you and other, serving the citizen of New Mexico.’ As of today, deputy secretary of state, Mary Quintana is fulfilling Ms. Duran’s place until the governor chooses who will be replacing her until the upcoming election in 2016. Any further and additional details or information regarding Ms. Duran’s replacement or charges will be released in the coming weeks. The degree of punishment and the formal legal consequences applied to Ms. Duran is scheduled to be on December 14, 2015.

Daphne is a graduate student in accounting with a Certification in Forensic Accounting, at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2016.

Posted by Luca Aufiero.

In the article, “BizEquity Launches Online Valuation Tool for Accountants,” Daniel Hood discusses how BizEquity, an online business valuation system for businesses to be able to estimate the value of their businesses, launched a new product called Accountant Office. For accountants and advisors, this new business solution of BizEquity successfully improves the valuation process. Using a keen platform for its refined algorithms and big data knowledge, accountants and advisors will be able to provide clients with real-time awareness of what their business is really worth, more efficiently and cheaply. Accountant Office costs less than one-tenth of the average business valuation fee of $8,000. It can also deliver a valuation report in minutes compared to the average time of 3-6 weeks it takes for traditional business valuation firms to deliver a valuation. BizEquity’s business solutions help companies create, manage, and optimize its business valuations. This may revolutionize the business valuation landscape pertaining to forensic accounting as technology and data cloud services are evolving among the profession.

Currently, BizEquity is one of the world’s largest providers of business valuations, valuing more than 29.4 million companies around the globe. PrimePay, one of the nation’s biggest private payroll companies and a network of more than 10,000 accountants, will be exclusively distributing Accountant Office in the U.S. The founder and CEO of BizEquity, Michael Carter, wanted to expand the views of the capabilities that accountants are perceived at by demonstrating their value in business advisory and not just tax planning. Somewhat as their motto and the first thing that stands out on their website, reads “What’s Your Business Worth?” BizEquity conveys the importance of business valuation to owners and to those accountants and advisors who will benefit from these tools in order to better inform them. With proper valuation knowledge, companies are in a more desirable position in determining the fair value of selling a business, ability to secure financing, and striving for growth.

Luca is a BS and MS in Accounting, Forensic Certificate Program, at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University. 

Reference:

Hood, Daniel. “BizEquity Launches Online Valuation Tool for Accountants.” Accounting Today. 20 Oct. 2015. Web. 20 Nov. 2015. http://www.accountingtoday.com/accounting-technology/news/bizequity-launches-online-valuation-tool-for-accountants-76144-1.html

Posted by Samar Baeshen.

According to an October 21, 2015 news article in The New York Times, “Criminals Should Get Same Leniency as Corporations,” there are many critics arguing that corporations trying to make a big effort to defend their misconducted executives ought to be treated like common criminals. In addition, Emmet G. Sullivan, a federal judge, thought that criminals should be treated like big companies. Due to Obama administration’s method which gives companies the opportunity to not have a criminal record, Judge Sullivan believes that individual criminals should enjoy the same chances. In fact, the Department of Justice officials concur with Judge Sullivan’s opinion, which criticizes the American criminal justice system, and encourage Congress to lower the adjudication standards. Meanwhile, the Justice Department issued a new memo recently and released new approaches to prosecute individual employees after years of accusations about Wall Street criminals.

According to Judge Sullivan, the court is frustrated that the postponed prosecution agreements are not being utilized to give the same chances to individual criminals without causing any negative effects on the criminal conviction. Moreover, there are lack of the postponed prosecution agreements, according to the Justice Department, for both corporations and individuals. However, comparing the number of cases against individuals and companies, cases against individual criminals are enormously more than companies.

In general, the target of the Judge Sullivan’s argument is to reduce the long Sentence for prisoners who did not commit violent crimes.

Samar is a graduate student in accounting at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University. 

Student Posts Archives

Posted by Michael Villafana.

Ten years ago from this June, the life of Koua Fong Lee changed forever, as well as those who were in the car who Lee crashed into. Koua Fong Lee was entering onto an entrance ramp in his home state of Minnesota, when all of a sudden his Toyota Camry sped up, instead of slowing down at the upcoming stoplight. His Camry crashed into the back of another car, killing two instantly including a 9-year-old child, and a 7-year-child later in the hospital. Lee was charged with criminal vehicular homicide in a Minnesota court where he testified that he attempted to break but his car would not slow down. Toyota, on the other hand, testified that Lee indeed tried to break, but he was actually stepping on the gas pedal instead of the break. Lee was found guilty and sentenced to eight years in prison.

In 2009, Toyota issued a recall on some of its models over acceleration issues. This prompted Lee’s legal team to revisit the case. However, it was not Lee’s team that filed a lawsuit against Toyota. It was the passengers in the car that was hit from behind by Lee. Lee joined the lawsuit claiming that his 1996 Camry inexplicably accelerated. Toyota had already settled several lawsuits over this issue, but the Lee case was one of their biggest to date.

The lawsuit went to court, where jurors heard expert testimony from both sides. Lee’s attorney used the help of an automobile expert John Stilson to help prove that every time Lee stepped on the gas, the speed would increase and would stick at that speed. Ultimately, the expert testimony given by Stilson and others led Lee’s team to a court victory. The jury ruled in favor of Lee’s team resulting in a huge compensatory pay for the victims. Toyota was ordered to pay $10.9 million in damages, being split between the victims of the crash and the Lee family. Koua Fong Lee was released from prison in 2010, after wrongly being placed there. After being released from prison, Lee stated “My life and my family is not the same anymore. So they [Toyota] are responsible for that.”

Michael is a sports management major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Luis Ferreira, Jr.

Volkswagen, who recently met the goal of becoming the world’s biggest car making company, has gotten themselves into some legal troubles. The accusations stem from excessive amounts of pollutants caused by their cars and using emission cheating software to cover it up. The company has installed the software into 11 million engines worldwide. The software is supposed to limit the amount of a toxic nitrogen oxide that is released from the car, however, the company’s device instead lets the vehicle release pollutants about 40 more times the legal amount. Volkswagen did this because it lets the car have better acceleration and fuel economy. This device is illegal in the United States and in many other countries.

The court gave the company until April 21, 2016 to fix all of their cars. The court told the German car company that if the cars were not fixed by this specific date, then they would a breach trial. The company is also getting fined in all of the countries it sold the cars in and facing many legal suits from car owners that are very upset over this dispute. Everything, including cars fixed, payments to unpleased customers, and timing, must be resolved by April 21st or the company will be going to trial.

Volkswagen has said they are “’committed to resolving the US regulatory investigation into the diesel emissions matter as quickly as possible and to implementing a solution for affected vehicles.’”

The company has said they are going to follow all of the orders by the judge to be able to avoid trial and get the company out of these legal troubles.

Luis is a business law student at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University.

Posted by Brooke Sabol.

Gucci America, Inc. sought default judgement, an award of statutory damages, costs of the suit and a permanent injunction against defendant Wang Huoqing. The hearing on the motion was on October 8, 2010. Gucci became aware that Wang was selling fake products bearing the Gucci name and trademark on the internet to U.S residents. Gucci ended up suing Wang. The court needed to decide if Gucci had jurisdiction over Wang before it could enter default judgement.

The court granted default judgement against defendant Wang on false designation. The court awarded statutory damages to Gucci America, Bottega Veneta International S.A.R.L, Balenciaga S.A. Gucci America was awarded $440,000, Bottega Veneta International S.A.R.L was awarded $4,000, and lastly Balenciaga S.A. was awarded $8,000. For prejudgment interest Gucci was awarded $12,768.92, Bottega Venteta was awarded $116.08, and Balenciaga S.A $232.16. Lastly they were each awarded $233.33 on the basis of defendant’s trademark infringement.

In my opinion, I believe the default judgment order was fair. Wang was at fault by illegally copyrighting Gucci’s trademark.

Brooke Sabol is a marketing major at Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Ismail Surakat.

This is a case between Southern District of Georgia and Vania Lee Allen, a native of Jamaica, who committed a fraud and falsely impersonating a United Sates FBI special agent in connection with an international lottery fraud arrangement based in Jamaica. According to the indictment, 30-year-old Vania Lee Allen was charged for conspiracy to commit wire fraud and also, impersonating United States employee. Allen and her co-conspirator from Jamaica illegitimately enriched themselves through fraudulent lottery plan, targeting elderly residents of Evans, Georgia.

According to this case, Allen traveled from Jamaica to United States in May 2015 and presented herself as an FBI special agent in order to convince her victim. Though, before getting to this stage, Allen had made some movement such as informing the victim by phone that they had won money in a lottery game and instructed them to make some certain payments to her co-conspirator in Jamaica for them to collect their lump sum winnings. She also discussed with a co-conspirator in Jamaica on how to impersonate an FBI using a fake law enforcement badge with the “FBI” logo and the words, “Federal Bureau of Investigation.” Upon arrival at the victim’s place, Allen presented as an FBI special agent and asked the victim to speak on-line with her co-conspirator in Jamaica. All of this was made to look real; no doubt elderly citizens can fall victim to this type of  fraudulent act.

The case was investigated by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service and the Columbia County Georgia Sherriff’s Office, and is being prosecuted as well by Trial Attorney Clint Narver of the Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch and Assistant U.S.  Attorney Troy Clark of the Southern District of Georgia.

If Allen is eventually convicted, she faces up to 20 years in prison for the wire fraud, five years for the conspiracy count, as well as, up to three years for the false impersonation count.

Ismail Surakat is a pre business major at Seton Hall University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Kyle Chapman.

On January 18, 2015, the New England Patriots played the Indianapolis Colts in the AFC Championship. The Patriots would go on to win the game, but a massive legal controversy would follow in the aftermath of the game. Reports arose after the game that the Patriots had used footballs inflated below regulation towards their advantage during the game. Using footballs against regulation is a very consequential action and the National Football League was not happy with the reports one bit. A massive investigation and legal battle between the Patriots and the NFL would ensue.

A few days later, the NFL assigned Manhattan attorney, Ted Wells, to get to the bottom of the situation. The case was receiving heavy media coverage and had the Patriots’ public image in hot water. Nobody from the organization admitted to being aware of the apparent cheating and denied any involvement. The investigation was completed on May 6, 2015 with a 243 page investigative report known as “The Wells Report.”

The Wells Report appeared to have the Patriots caught red-handed. A very important aspect of the report came from scientific analysis provided by Exponent, which claimed that no set of environmental or physical factors could’ve accounted for the air loss shown in the balls. This meant that the air loss were the actions of people, and accused locker-room attendant Jim McNally and equipment assistant John Jastremski as the culprits. There were several text messages between that reference inflation, deflation, and needles. The texts suggest that Patriots quarterback, Tom Brady, was aware of their actions, but the coaching staff was unaware. The investigation concluded that it was “more probable than not,” that the Patriots equipment personnel had broken the rules.

The NFL decided to suspend Tom Brady for four games and give the Patriots a $1 million fine while stripping them of draft picks. Brady pursued an appeal on his suspension and began a long legal battle with the NFL. He felt falsely accused and very harshly punished. After a long battle, on September 3, 2015, a settlement was reached and the suspension was taken away, with a claim that Brady had a lack of fair due process.

I think the situation could’ve been handled much better than it was. For starters, the media had completely scrutinized the scandal and blew it out of proportion. I think it pinned Brady and the Patriots in guilty before proven innocent image, even though there wasn’t much evidence at all that showed their involvement in the scandal. There were also leaks of false evidence early on that made the Patriots appear guilty.

The NFL has been in hot water lately with legal situations and I think this whole case hurt their image.

Kyle is a management major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Kyle Chapman.

Hillary Clinton was accused of using a personal email account out of her home for her official email communication while she was Secretary of State. She used her family’s private email server, instead of using the official State Department email account maintained on federal government servers. Government officials argue that the use of a private server, private messaging system software, and deleting almost 32,000 emails has violated State Department procedures and federal laws of recordkeeping requirements. Some of these emails are deemed to be “Top Secret” and confidential information. In my opinion, this is a violation of federal law.

After a CNN interview, a new opportunity has shown some light for Hillary. Hillary stated, “Everything I did was permitted. There was no law. There was no regulation.” To clarify, the legal requirement to immediately preserve emails from a nongovernment email account was not put into law until two years after she stepped down as Secretary of State. She claims that she has done nothing wrong because there was no law enforced when she committed the act. Hillary stated that other Secretaries of State did the same thing, but there are no records of other secretaries setting up a private email server for all of their government communications. In addition, while Hillary was Secretary of State, she sent a cable containing her signature warning employees to avoid handling official business from a personal email account.

Therefore, Hillary was well informed of her actions. Even though there was not a specific law enforcing to preserve emails from nongovernment accounts, Clinton knew what she was doing. In that case, I find Hillary guilty for her actions.

This whole controversy started when officials were unable to locate emails in the investigation of the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya. It looks like as if she was covering her tracks by deleting those emails on her private server. Not only did this interfere with the investigation, but a hacker attempted to hack into her email server.

Mishandling top secret government information is a federal crime. In conclusion, I find Hillary guilty for the use of mishandling government information by using her own private email server.

Kyle is a management major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Emily Nichols.

On November 5, 2015, six men were convicted on felony charges of fraud and conspiracy in the sale of vending machine business opportunities. All six of these men were from New York, and they were just six of the 22 individuals convicted with this vending machine scheme. Two of the men were convicted with conspiracy and six counts of fraud and one count of false statement to federal agents. The third man was convicted on conspiracy and mail fraud. Two of the men were convicted of conspiracy and wire fraud and the final man was convicted of conspiracy and two counts of wire fraud.

They were convicted following the six week trial where some of the men will be in jail for 40 years according to their maximum sentence for conspiracy, fraud counts and false statements. These six men, were the last of the 22 convicted for the entire Vendstar scheme.

The company not only advertised nationwide on the internet and in newspapers, but they also promised to have the full package for the customer, saying that they would provide everything to operate the vending machine including the initial supply of candy for the machine. Once the machines were ordered, they dropped the machine off to the businesses wherever and however they could, not placing the machine in any certain place, and many businesses requested immediate removal of the machine. The men attempted to sell vending machines to businesses and promised them that they would make loads of money off of the machines and the customers would pay tens of thousands of dollars to invest in the machines. Between the five years of the operation of the scheme, it cost consumers a total of around $60 Million. If the customer paid an average of $10,000, then there were about 6,000 victims of this scheme once it was all said and done.

These men, I feel, were convicted correctly of their crimes and deserve to be in jail for what will most likely be the rest of their lives as the men were all above the age of 40, three of them being over the ae of 55. In the entirety, just 22 people cause a loss of $60 Million to consumers and businesses.

Emily is an accounting and finance major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Emily Nichols.

In late 2013, the Texas State Conference of NAACP filed suit challenging Texas’s photo voter ID law. The specific law that was being challenged was S.B. 14, which was enacted in 2011 and requires voters to present photo ID from a limited list of approved identification in order to vote. This law disproportionately prevents groups of voters which include African American citizens from voting in person due to the law’s strictness.

I found it interesting that this law was even able to be passed but reading further into the case I found that the law was not passed until there was a case in 2013 in the Supreme Court that rendered Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act inoperable, which opened the gates for Texas to implement the SB 14 law.

After the 8 day trial, a 3 judge panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals universally decided that the SB 14 law violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The appellate court agreed with plaintiffs that SB 14 has a racially discriminatory influence that violates the Voting Rights Act. The panel similarly ruled that the district court should hear more evidence on the intentional discrimination claim. It annulled the district court’s verdict that the ID law violated the Constitution.

The law was applied during the November 2014 election and cut many voters out of the political process of the presidential elections.

I think that this was an important case because the entire point of having a democracy is having the people be the say if what goes on with the government. With not being able to vote, and cutting out many of the voters in a very large portion of the population of Texas, it was cutting off people’s right to vote and thus really hurting the idea of democracy.

Emily is an accounting and finance major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Jose L. Diaz.

Imagine having a potential life-ending disease or illness that you depend on medication for to survive. Money is tight, and most of your savings goes towards purchasing the medication in order to survive. Suddenly, just overnight, the price of this drug not only increases, but it increases by 5000%. While it sounds absolutely absurd, this actually happened when Turing Pharmaceuticals, a startup company being run by a former hedge fund manager, increased the price of their drug called Daraprim, from $13.50 a tablet to $750 a tablet overnight. That is not $750 a prescription–it is $750 per tablet. This brought the annual cost of treatment for some patients to over a hundred thousand dollars.

Martin Shkreli, CEO of Turing Pharmaceuticals, claims that the drug is so rarely used that the price increase would not have a significant effect on the health system. He claims that the money earned from the price increase would go towards developing better treatments for toxoplasmosis, the disease that is treated by Daraprim. However, the price increase will make it almost impossible for private insurers like Medicare and patients in hospitals to attain. The fact that the drug is so expensive and hard to attain now, it makes it harder for other companies to make samples of the drug and replicate it. Overall, the drug is the leading treatment for the life-threatening parasitic infection toxoplasmosis. The increase in price seems to be an only profit-driven choice.

Jose is finance and accounting major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University.

Posted by Renaldo Nel.

Judge, Sheri Pym, of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, recently ordered Apple to assist the FBI in an investigation involving the San Bernardino terror attacks. The Apple iPhone belonging to one of the shooters, Syed Farook, was recovered by the FBI. The FBI wants to gain access to the iPhone, but faces security software that will wipe the iPhone’s memory after 10 incorrect password attempts. As a result, the FBI wants Apple to provide them with software that will enable them to unlock Farook’s iPhone, as they believe there is possible evidence on the phone.

Apple has appealed the decision made by Judge Pym stating “writing code is like speech, and so the request is a violation of Apple’s First Amendment rights.” Apple also argues that the government should not have the power to order a private company to alter its product. Apple wants to protect their consumers as they believe that creating a backdoor in the software compromises the security of all iPhone’s, including, iPhone users’ personal information, such as bank accounts and medical records.

The Department of Justice’s argument is that “it a single request for a single phone, and doesn’t not create a back door for bad actors, but rather a front door for law enforcement only when it has a warrant.” The Department of Justice is basing its argument on the All Writs Act of 1789. Apple believes that this law can simply not be applied in modern times and is long overdue for amendment.

Many tech companies such as Microsoft, Facebook and Google have stated that they support Apple. I am also in support of Apple. Firstly, it is known fact that the FBI has been hacked in the past and the probability that the software that the FBI is asking for will be leaked is huge. It would be catastrophic if hackers could get their hands on personal information such as credit cards in the Apple Pay function. Secondly, one should also take into account that people place faith in Apple to protect their personal data and if Apple is forced to provide this “unlocking software” they could suffer huge financial losses. Furthermore, if Appel loses this case it sets precedent in the tech industry and companies would in future be forced “to modify their products, on spec, for the FBI in ways that are contrary to their core values.”

I understand that the FBI wants to solve the case and protect the country, however their proposal opens the door for many other evils.

Renaldo is an economics major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2019.

Sources:

Apple V. FBI Encryption Case Shows That Lawsuits Are Inherently Polarizing

http://www.abc-7.com/story/31521736/apple-vs-the-fbi-in-2-minutes

May 2015 – Page 3 of 4 – Blog Business Law – a resource for business law students

Posted by Kyle Gatyas.

On April 16, 2015, Counsel to the City of Trenton announced that “the Trenton Paid Sick Leave ordinance would only apply to businesses located in the city itself.” (Bond). They stated that they will not apply to businesses outside the borders of Trenton. This new paid leave ordinance came in effect on March 4, 2015. One thing this law does is it excludes construction unions and other employees and covers them by collective bargaining agreements from the paid sick leave requirements (Bond). Both part-time and full-time workers have the ability to be paid on their time off by the rate of 1 hour of sick time for every 30 hours worked. “Employers with 10 or more employees have to provide up to five paid days each year, whereas businesses with less employees have to provide up to three paid days each year.” (Bond). There is an exception, only for workers in childcare, food service, and home healthcare who are automatically entitled to five days.

For employees, there is a certain requirement in order to be eligible to qualify for paid sick days. You must have a maximum of 40 hours per year regardless of the size of your employer. “However, they are not able to use more than 40 hours in one year. Usually, they are not entitled to carry over anytime if they were paid for the hours they did not use.” (Bond). Also, you are not eligible to qualify for this requirement until you have been working for at least 90 days. As the employees begin their employment, or as soon as they are practicable, the employers provide them with a written notice explaining their rights. “This ordinance also provides language to prohibit retaliation against employees exercising their rights” (Bond). Failing to do so creates an additional liability to the employees since the ordinance creates an explicit right to sue if an employee believes their right have been violated. “They could also face monetary fines and other penalties.” (Bond).

Kyle is currently undeclared at Montclair State University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Jellyn Anne Echon.

In a business, it’s important to be ethical and that includes treating your co-workers/employees with respect. Unfortunately, McDonalds failed to see that. The Virginia-based franchise of McDonalds was sued by 10 former employees for allegedly violating their civil rights. The article states that, “In a lawsuit filed in federal court, the plaintiffs allege that both McDonalds and one of its franchisees violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act by subjecting employees to rampant racial and sexual harassment.” Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act protects people against employment discrimination on the bases of race and color, along with national origin, sex, and religion.

According to the lawsuit, employees were called inappropriate names by managers as well as being sexually harassed. As far as race discrimination is concerned, according to the lawsuit, African American employees were disciplined for petty things before being fired shortly after, while the caucasian employees nearly got away with anything and were hired more. One of the plaintiffs, Katrina Stanfield, spoke about her experience and stated that, “Being a good worker didn’t matter. . . . I was fired for being black.”

In response, McDonald’s media hotline just states that,

We have not seen the lawsuit, and cannot comment on its allegations, but will review the matter carefully. . . . McDonald’s has a long-standing history of embracing the diversity of employees, independent franchisees, customers and suppliers, and discrimination is completely inconsistent with our values. McDonald’s and our independent owner-operators share a commitment to the well-being and fair treatment of all people who work in McDonald’s restaurants.

Jellyn is a business administration major with a concentration in finance at Montclair State University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Gabrielle Francois.

I chose a business law article from the Wall Street Journal to review. The title of the article is Six Baltimore Police Officers Charged in Freddie Gray Death. The article explains the following; a brief explanation of the young man named Freddie Gray’s death, charges toward the police officers behind the death and the attorney’s defense against the charges.

Freddie Gray was a young twenty-five year old African-American male who was killed by six police officers in Baltimore, Maryland. Freddie experienced fatal spinal cord injuries while under custody. The six officers responsible are: Officers William Porter (25 years old), Lt. Brian Rice (41 years old), and Sgt. Alicia White (30 years old), Edward Nero (29 years old), Garrett Miller (26 years old), and Mr. Goodson (45 years old).

Officers William Porter, Lt. Brian Rice and Sgt. Alicia White were charged with involuntary manslaughter, second-degree assault and misconduct in office. Edward Nero and Garrett Miller were charged with second-degree assault and misconduct in office. Then lastly Mr. Goodson was charged with second-degree murder, involuntary manslaughter and other charges.

After the charges were set into place Mike Davey, who is Lt. Rice’s attorney, spoke for all six officers. Mike Davey stated, “I have never seen such a hurried rush to deliver criminal charges,” said Mr. Davey, who appeared with Gene Ryan, president of the Baltimore police union. “We believe these officers will be vindicated as they have done nothing wrong.” (wallstreetjournal.com).

After resolving this situation so quickly, a few people have some concerns about this decision, while others (mainly African-American communities) praise this decision. Now, it is shocking for many to believe that the police are actually being punished for a crime unlike (what many believe) the rest in other states relating to African-American murders.

Gabrielle is a marketing major at Montclair State University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Kate Robinson.

Jordan Belfort, an infamous stockbroker, known for making millions in the 1990s, plead guilty to securities fraud and money laundering in 1999. In 2003, he was sentenced to four years in prison, but only served 22 months and owed a personal fine of $110 million. Today, Mr. Belfort’s story is known as being the basis for the 2013 film, “The Wolf of Wall Street.”

In 1989, Jordan Belfort was illegally running his own investment company, Stratton Oakmont. Mr. Belfort and his partner, Danny Porush, were able to make millions by defrauding their company’s investors by using a “pump and dump” scheme. Brokers would push stocks onto their innocent clients, which would help to inflate the stocks’ prices. The company would then sell off its own holdings in these stocks at an extreme profit.

During the time when Mr. Belfort was at an all-time high in his so-called career, he spent lavishly. His business was able to give him the funds to purchase a mansion, sports cars, and several other expensive toys. But with the help of his abundance of cash, Mr. Belfort developed a serious drug addiction, which often lead him to trouble. However, to this day he has developed an interest in writing and has released two memoirs. He currently lives in Los Angeles, California and operates his own company, which provides sales training and markets “Straight Line” training programs aimed at building wealth. Mr. Belfort claims to have straightened out his life since serving his time in prison, and has reportedly paid $14 million of the $110 million fine levied against him.

Kate is a sports, events and tourism marketing major at Montclair State University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Kate Robinson.

Tyco International, Limited, is a corporation that provides over three million customers globally with fire protection and security products and services. It is currently the world’s largest pure-play fire and security company. Tyco is incorporated in Switzerland and its operational headquarters are located in Princeton, New Jersey.

In 2002, Tyco’s former CEO, Dennis Kozlowski and CFO, Mark Swartz, were charged for stealing $150 million and inflating the company income by $500 million. The two of them were siphoning money through unapproved loans and fraudulent stock sales. They would then smuggle the money out of the company disguised as executive bonuses and benefits.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Manhattan District Attorney investigated the scheme and uncovered questionable accounting practices, such as large loans made out to Mr. Kozlowski, which were later forgiven. After discovering these violations, Mr. Kozlowski and Mr. Swartz were sentenced to 8 to 25 years in prison and a lawsuit was filed forcing Tyco to pay back $2.92 billion to their investors.

Kate is a sports, events and tourism marketing major at Montclair State University, Class of 2017.

A Raleigh police officer sued Starbucks in 2012 for burns he sustained when the lid of his coffee cup popped off. According to the officer, when the lid came off, the cup collapsed and burned him. The stress activated his Crohn’s disease, and as a result, he lost part of his intestine. He claims damages of $50,000. His wife also sued for loss of companionship.

This is a classic case of the Eggshell Skull Rule: “take the plaintiff as they are.” Here, the officer’s Crohn’s disease is an unforeseeable circumstance of the burns, yet Starbucks may still be liable, according to the rule. The case is an analog to the Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants case discussed in class.

Posted by Nadia Haddad.

Throughout the article, “Intellectual Property,” the author Darren Dahl talks about four different common fallacies that small business is unaware. The two most precious resources for any small business owner are time and money. Small business owners believe that it is not worth the time or effort to secure intellectual property rights. A patent can cost up to $25,000 to secure, in comparison to trademarks and Web addresses, which are cheap and can be obtained with the help of a lawyer.

In one case, Daniel Lubetzky, chief executive of New York City, Kind Snacks, heard that one of his competitors had copied the packaging, look, and feel of his bars. Lubetzky had secured components for his property like trademarks, trade dress, and Web addresses after founding his company. Mr. Lubetzky sent a competitor that was stealing his IP a cease-and-desist letter in order to stop the offender.

The above example stresses the erroneous belief that “once I get a trademark, my brand is safe.” In another case, Tracey Deschaine, who runs a restaurant called Dixie Picnic in Ocean City, N.J., secured trademarks, logo and name of her signature item, cupcakes. Even though she had trademarks for her business, someone else was monitoring the activity on the United States Patents and Trademark Office’s website and her spotted her application. They secured the Web address, or URL, before she could. This shows that, just because you have a trademark, it does not mean you are completely protected.

The third topic mentioned was about how “having a patent gives me the right to produce something.” What a patent does is gives you the right to prevent someone else from producing what your patent covers. Mr. Kocher of Cryptography Research says, “having a strong IP position helps ensure that other pay you for your innovation like they would on a toll on a road.” (Dahl).

Another fallacy mentioned is “If I have a patent or trademark in the United States, I don’t need to worry about the rest of the world.” In some countries, like Japan, it is expensive to acquire patents. The author suggested when deciding what your international IP strategy should be, consult a lawyer, and conduct some cost-benefit analysis to see if expanding your IP rights makes proper sense.

The last fallacy the article states “people who collect patents but don’t actually make anything are ‘patent trolls.’” In many cases, companies invent something, obtain a patent, and license it out for manufacturing by another. An example described was how a patent for wireless e-mail delivery held by NTP, a small holding company, something that R.I.M eventually would pay millions of dollars to license from them. The problem with this was NTP was trying to enforce its patent when it did notmake any products itself from the beginning.

Nadia is a business administration major with a minor in international business at Montclair State University, Class of 2016.

Posted by Daniel Lamas.

In October 2013, Shaneen Allen was arrested for carrying a registered gun across the New Jersey border. Allen, who is a Pennsylvania native, was going on a routine visit to New Jersey when she was pulled over. As she opened her glove compartment, the officer noticed the concealed weapon. Allen was questioned and arrested.

Allen’s punishment could have included up to three years in prison, but thankfully her attorney got her out of serious jail time. Allen was in hot water for almost two years. Recently, Governor Chris Christie issued a pardon to Allen and was praised by many gun rights groups. As an American, I feel that the Second Amendment is very important, not only to people as individuals, but mainly to show what this country was built upon.

Personally, I do not feel that Allen did anything wrong as she was a legal, registered carrier and had no bad intentions. Governor Christie did the right thing and helped defend a very important amendment that supports what our Founding Fathers would have wanted. Not many people would have been quick to pardon somebody in Allen’s situation, but luckily for her, Governor Christie had her back. People like Allen who are legal carriers are what keeps the country the way the Founding Fathers intended it to be. If more gun owners were registered like Allen, crime would be monitored easier and street violence would come to an ease.

Daniel is a business management and merchandising major at Montclair State University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Daniel Lamas.

After the release of Chris Kyle’s 2013 memoir, Jesse Ventura was very displeased to find out that Kyle was making claims about punching him in the face in 2006. Kyle did not use Ventura’s name in the book, but only referred to the incident by saying he “knocked out a celebrity.” Only in later interviews did Kyle publicly acknowledge the mystery celebrity as Ventura.

This angered Ventura especially due to the fact that he claimed that Kyle was making the story up. Ventura who was also a Navy veteran was even more displeased to find out that Kyle’s reason for hitting him, as depicted in the book, was due to Ventura making disrespectful remarks about the military. Ventura immediately took the matter to the courts. Not too long after, Kyle was killed at a shooting range and left behind a loving family and many adoring admirers.

Ventura still went ahead with the lawsuit and ended up suing New York publishing company HarperCollins over the book, claiming defamation. He was then awarded 1.8 million dollars from Chris Kyle’s estate. The aftermath of the lawsuit angered many people and soiled Ventura’s name even more. Ventura has said many times that he has no regrets over what he did and meant no harm or disrespect towards Kyle’s family and widow. Although many people across the country are now holding a grudge against the former Minnesota governor, he still won the battle of legal games.

Daniel is a business management and merchandising major at Montclair State University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Marlon Javier Tatis.

As roughly a million Apple customers impatiently wait for their watches to arrive, they now have an answer as to what’s the holdup. Apple claims to have found a defect in the “taptic engine of the watch, which mimics the sensation of being tapped on the wrist, the newspaper said Wednesday.” With record orders already in the smart watch category, Apple has a lot of work to do to keep up supply. They are jumping into a different market aside from cellphones, which they try to dominate.

Ever since the watch was announced last year, millions of customers have been anxiously waiting for the release date to order the device. Hundreds of thousands of people lined up outside Apple stores across the nation waiting to order their watch and be amongst the first to own the next piece of technological innovation.

With Samsung, LG, Motorola and plenty of other top companies already in the smart watch business, Apple has a lot of catching up. They are entering the market a little late, and having delivery of so many watches delayed isn’t the best way to enter a new market.

Marlon is a business administration student with a concentration in finance at Montclair State University, Class of 2016.

November 2015

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

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 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.

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 Mary Bonatakis.

With a number of lawsuits against Uber and other applications that beckon workers at the touch of an app, Miss Shannon Liss-Riordan has become one of the most important figures in Silicon Valley. Ms.Liss-Riordan is the Boston lawyer who is putting Uber on trial. The Uber case will come down to whether Uber can convince a jury that its classification of drivers as independent contractors and not employees of Uber, is suitable.

Ms.Liss-Riordan is representing drivers who say the car service company has illegally classified their field of work. Uber is claiming employees are considered “freelancers” and not actual Uber employees. A freelancer is someone who is self-employed. Since Uber is not declaring them as employees, they are not required to reimburse drivers for their expenses such as gas, or car damages. Ms.Liss-Riordan is also suing Lyft, Postmates and other applications like Uber. This huge lawsuit is putting Ms.Liss-Riordan in the middle of the debate over the standing of on-demand workers in the United States.

This case has been closely watched and will be continued in trial as early as next year. “A final verdict against Uber in this case could change how the firm does business with its drivers and send shocks through the on-demand economy” (Weber, Silverman). Uber’s lawyers have made it clear that they have no plans of settling and are willing to fight this case all the way to the Supreme Court. The lawyers are arguing that their app is used to connect car owners to people seeking rides and is not in charge of the fleet of drivers.

Ms.Liss-Riordan opposes by saying there is no reason Uber can’t provide its drivers the basic labor protections. “She has logged victories in the field of wage and hour law, bringing employers including Starbucks Corp. and her alma mater, Harvard University, into compliance with state and federal laws governing workers’ pay and employment status. Strategically using each ruling to build the next, her cases have targeted FedEx Corp., cleaning firms, and a strip club called King Arthur’s Lounge over the classification of their workers” (Weber, Silverman). Ms.Liss-Riordan is using all of her resources to prove Uber wrong in their classification of workers. Ms.Liss-Riordan’s goal is to shape the definition of employment with all of our advancements in technology.

Ms.Liss-Riordan doesn’t believe this case will take out Uber completely but just reclassify drivers to get the benefits and reimbursements that they deserve. “The Uber case will be a key test of Ms. Liss-Riordan’s belief that New Deal-era labor laws are adequate to respond to the emergence of an on-demand economy” (Weber, Silverman). Although this case is only going to affect California Uber drivers Ms.Liss-Riordan hopes that this case will expand to the rest of the country.

Mary is an accounting and information technology 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 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 Philip Lacki.

Trump’s tax plan will make it simpler to pay the government. After graduation, I plan on moving to Atlanta, GA and work for Delta Air Lines. Why am I getting into my future? Well because, U.S. companies pay the highest corporate taxes in the world, and as an aviation geek and enthusiast, U.S. Airlines pay some of the highest tax rates in the United States. U.S Airlines pay 38% in taxes, the highest in the industry. These numbers are ridiculous; only alcohol and tobacco companies pay these fees.

Delta Amsterdam, which is a foreign subsidiary based in the Netherlands of course, has a corporate tax rate of 25%. Delta has a large presence and hub at Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam and has brought some parts of its operations into the Netherlands. Donald Trump’s tax plan will help companies such as Delta come back into the United States and compete fairly.

Trump’s 15% tax rate will allow many U.S. based companies to be more competitive, provide more jobs, and operate more efficiently. Rates this high should be against the law and they need to be brought down. This post applies to business law because it applies to the laws of corporations and in this case, these companies aren’t being treated in a lawful way.

Philip is a public relations major at Seton Hall University with a minor in business administration at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Kirill Ivanov.

Tesla, a popular tech firm, is commonly known for its production of electronically-powered cars and batteries. Tesla Motors is among many ventures pioneered by Elon Musk, who has commanded the SpaceX programs as well as many other development projects. Tesla vehicles are not as popular as those produced by Honda or Toyota; while one may occasionally spot a Tesla model out on the road, sightings are few and far between. In order to expand their sales and drive more Tesla vehicles out onto the roads, Tesla Motors initiated a referral program. This referral program, which was based on rewarding customers for purchasing the company’s products, boasted many incentives for potential Tesla buyers as well as current owners.

According to Tesla Motors, anyone who ordered a brand new Tesla Model S before October 31st using a referral link from a current Tesla owner would get $1,000 off the listed purchase price. In return, the current owner providing the referral would receive a $1,000 voucher for a Tesla service center visit or a Tesla accessory. The offer went on to offer a $25,000 discount for a new Tesla Founder Series Model X, which is not available to the public, when a person provides ten referrals. Why was this program illegal? Tesla Motors simply created a way to thank its customers for building the Tesla community while simultaneously reeling in new customers to expand the existing community.

Unfortunately, Tesla’s referral program happened to violate a California State Law, which is quite ironic due to the fact that the company’s headquarters are located in Palo Alto, California. The company’s referral program violated the California Automobile Sales Finance Act, which states the following:

It is unlawful for any seller to induce or attempt to induce any person to enter into a contract subject to this chapter by offering a rebate, discount, commission, or other consideration, contingent upon the happening of a future event, on the condition that the buyer either sells, or gives information or assistance for the purpose leading to a sale by the seller of, the same or related goods.

As a result of its failure to comply with California State Laws, the Tesla Motors referral program did not attract the customers the company had hoped it would. Many businesses use referral programs to benefit loyal customers while simultaneously attracting new ones, but it is extremely important for such business to be aware of local laws. Ignorance on a company’s part can result in catastrophic legal damages, but lucky enough for Tesla the company only received a written warning from the California Department of Motor Vehicles.

Kirill is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2018.

Source: 

Title: DMV warns Tesla it’s referral program is unlawful

Author: Mark Glover

Published: October 15, 2015

Link: ( http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/article39309483.html )

Posted by Kirill Ivanov.

This article discusses a team of cyber criminals accused of cyber fraud for targeting various companies within the United States. Gery Shalon, Joshua Aaron, and Ziv Orenstein were charged in a 23-count indictment alongside crimes targeting 12 different companies. Their unlawful behavior is stated to be traced as far back as 2007. These men ran an enterprise that has been accused of pumping up stock prices, running online casinos, processing payments for criminals, laundering money, and exchanging illegal bitcoins. Prosecutors stated that the illegal proceeds from their manipulation of stock prices equaled tens of millions of dollars. One particular quotation that stands out describes the defendants’ schemes:

The alleged conduct also signals the next frontier in securities fraud – sophisticated hacking to steal nonpublic information, something the defendants discussed for the next stage of their sprawling enterprise. Fueled by their hacking, the defendants’ criminal schemes allegedly generated hundreds of millions of dollars in illicit proceeds.

The future of cyber crime could be moving into this “next frontier,” and it may even evolve to encompass other crimes such as insider trading. What if hackers discover a way to access a company’s emails and databases, then use the this inside information to trade outside the company? This ability would allow such criminals to operate from “within” the company without physically setting foot in its headquarters; these cyber criminals would, in essence, operate as ghosts.

Kirill is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2018.

Source:

Title: “U.S. charges three in huge cyber fraud targeting JPMorgan, others”

Author: Jonathan Stempel and Nate Raymond

Published: November 10, 2015 4:43pm EST

Link: ( http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/10/us-hacking-indictment-idUSKCN0SZ1VM20151110#c1rBtki5qh764cBV.97 )

Fraud and Forensic Accountants in Co-Ops/Condos

Posted by Luca Aufiero.

In the article, “Dealing with Fraud in Your Building – Forensic Accounting,” Steven Cutler discusses the types of fraud among co-ops and condos, the possible red flags, as well as how it may be perpetrated and deterred. Some signs of fraud from higher management could entail sudden lifestyle changes and lavish expenditures such as new expensive cars, residences, and exotic vacations. As there isn’t as much fraud today as there used to be, back in the 90s, there were two years where roughly 140 managing agents and 25 management companies were indicted for kickbacks. “Still, even today, there are enough instances of fraud to keep busy forensic accountants, real estate attorneys, and district attorneys” (Cutler). The more common type of fraud in a company is the misappropriation of cash. For example, management may use funds from the company to pay for personal expenses or use forged bank records to run multiple books.

More often than not, fraud is perpetrated by a member of the staff. This is all starts with the fraud pyramid: motive, rationalization, and opportunity. Some employees might not be monitored as much as they should or have certain access to records, giving them an opportunity to commit fraud. The motive is most likely to reside from a personal standpoint. Possibly drug related, family problems, or more commonly, financial problems. The rationalization behind the act might be that the person “deserves it” (sense of being underpaid), or “just borrowing money temporarily” (even though it isn’t). Some red flags among the financials might include: large number of unrelated transactions, unexplained changes to reserve funds, and missing accounting records.

If fraud does occur, it is recommended to create a paper trail to document items not only for attorneys, but for forensic accountants to investigate the damages. The forensic accountant looks at the banks reconciliations, statements, canceled checks, and bills paid to have to total admission to the records. This will then result in whether the damages were from gross negligence or fraud. At that point in time, the attorney will decide if it should be a crime (especially if fraud is involved) and therefore be reported and prosecuted. Some deterrent procedures include monthly reviews/reconciliations of the financials, control over collections (lockbox), and monitoring the work of others.

Luca is a BS and MS student in accounting with a certification in forensic accounting at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University.

Reference:
Cutler, Steven. “Dealing with Fraud in Your Building – Forensic Accounting.” The Cooperator. Oct. 2015. Web. 20 Nov. 2015. http://cooperator.com/article/forensic-accounting

Fraud and Forensic Accountants in Co-Ops/Condos

Posted by Luca Aufiero.

In the article, “Dealing with Fraud in Your Building – Forensic Accounting,” Steven Cutler discusses the types of fraud among co-ops and condos, the possible red flags, as well as how it may be perpetrated and deterred. Some signs of fraud from higher management could entail sudden lifestyle changes and lavish expenditures such as new expensive cars, residences, and exotic vacations. As there isn’t as much fraud today as there used to be, back in the 90s, there were two years where roughly 140 managing agents and 25 management companies were indicted for kickbacks. “Still, even today, there are enough instances of fraud to keep busy forensic accountants, real estate attorneys, and district attorneys” (Cutler). The more common type of fraud in a company is the misappropriation of cash. For example, management may use funds from the company to pay for personal expenses or use forged bank records to run multiple books.

More often than not, fraud is perpetrated by a member of the staff. This is all starts with the fraud pyramid: motive, rationalization, and opportunity. Some employees might not be monitored as much as they should or have certain access to records, giving them an opportunity to commit fraud. The motive is most likely to reside from a personal standpoint. Possibly drug related, family problems, or more commonly, financial problems. The rationalization behind the act might be that the person “deserves it” (sense of being underpaid), or “just borrowing money temporarily” (even though it isn’t). Some red flags among the financials might include: large number of unrelated transactions, unexplained changes to reserve funds, and missing accounting records.

If fraud does occur, it is recommended to create a paper trail to document items not only for attorneys, but for forensic accountants to investigate the damages. The forensic accountant looks at the banks reconciliations, statements, canceled checks, and bills paid to have to total admission to the records. This will then result in whether the damages were from gross negligence or fraud. At that point in time, the attorney will decide if it should be a crime (especially if fraud is involved) and therefore be reported and prosecuted. Some deterrent procedures include monthly reviews/reconciliations of the financials, control over collections (lockbox), and monitoring the work of others.

Luca is a BS and MS student in accounting with a certification in forensic accounting at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University.

Reference:
Cutler, Steven. “Dealing with Fraud in Your Building – Forensic Accounting.” The Cooperator. Oct. 2015. Web. 20 Nov. 2015. http://cooperator.com/article/forensic-accounting

Elane Photography Asks High Court to Review Conscientious Objection Case

Posted by Tyquasia Yeshaya Bender.

I came across a case that interested me. A woman named Elaine Huguenin, who is photographer in the state of New Mexico, declined to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony. Her reason for declining the job was due to her religious beliefs. Photographing the event would have went against her religious beliefs about same sex marriage. Because of this, the couple from the ceremony filed a discrimination complaint against Elaine Huguenin’s business, Elane Photography. The business is also co-owned with her husband, Jonathan. However, on August 22, 2013, the New Mexico Supreme Court and the New Mexico Human Rights Commission both ruled against Elane Photography. On November 8th, 2013, the business then turned to the U.S. Supreme Court to review its case.

Elaine and and her husband Jonathan Huguenin are Christians. According to the their business policy, “The Huguenins will not create images that tell stories or convey messages contrary to their religious beliefs. For this reason, they have declined requests for nude maternity pictures and photographs portraying violence.” Elane Photography explains that the Huguenins have a “sincere religious belief that marriage is the union of a man and a woman.” In addition, the Huguenins believe that “if they were to communicate a contrary message about marriage—by, for example, telling the story of a polygamous wedding ceremony—they would be disobeying God.” For these reasons and beliefs, Elaine declined the job.

This story started in 2006, when a woman named Vanessa Willock inquired whether Elane Photography would be willing to photograph her commitment ceremony, which happened to be same-sex. At the time, same-sex individuals were not permitted to marry in the state of New Mexico. However, the law has changed since then. The Huguenins’ business declined the request because “they did not want to create images expressing messages about marriage that conflict with their religious beliefs,” as stated before. Elane Photography has explained that it “does not refuse customers because of their sexual orientation” and the Huguenins will “gladly serve gays and lesbians—by, for example, providing them with portrait photography—whenever doing so would not require them to create expression conveying messages that conflict with their religious beliefs.”

Vanessa Willock filed an administrative complaint alleging that Elane Photography had violated the state public accommodations statute by discriminating based on sexual orientation. The complaint resulted in proceedings before the New Mexico Human Rights Commission, which ruled against Elane Photography.

The First Amendment states that the government may neither establish any religion nor prohibit the free exercise of religious practices. The first part of the amendment is the Establishment Clause and the second part is the Free Exercise Clause. The Establishment Clause is the provision in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that prohibits Congress from creating any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” The Free Exercise Clause is the provision in the First Amendment preventing Congress from making any law “prohibiting the free exercise” of religion. (Cross, F., & Miller, R. (2015). Chapter 5: Business and the Constitution. In The Legal Environment of Business Text and Cases (9th ed., p. 643). Canada: Cengage Learning).

If the U.S. Supreme Court rules on Elane Photography’s free speech claim it may allow the Huguenins to operate their photography business without violating their religious beliefs about marriage.

Tyquasia is a business administration and retail management major at Montclair State University, Class of 2016/2017.