Judge Dismisses Apple Stores’ Employee Bag Search Case

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/.

Supreme Court Says Texas Can Reject Confederate Flag License Plate

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.

Morgan Stanely to Face Insider Trading Crisis

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.

Meet Shannon Liss-Riordan

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.

Trump – Tax and Law

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.

Twitter Stock Fraud

Posted by Lee Luu.

A federal grand jury indicted a man from Scotland for securities fraud after prosecutors said he manipulated stock prices using the social media application Twitter. James Alan Craig set up fake Twitter accounts in 2013 associated with real market research firms. Craig sent out false Tweets that would make the companies’ stock prices decrease, according to prosecutors. This would affect the shareholders on their purchase of stocks. After this atrocity, he would then buy the companies’ down-trending stock to make a profit when the stocks regained. According to prosecutors, shareholders’ stocks lost more than $1.6 million due to Craig’s illegal act.

The article quotes “This investigation dismantled a stock market manipulation scheme that operated with one goal in mind — to falsely defame a company in order to destroy its stock value for financial gain,” FBI Special Agent in Charge David Johnson said in a statement. Destroying a stock value for financial gain is unethical for it is detrimental to businesses. James Allen Craig committed a security fraud which meant inflating the price of stocks by brokers so that buyers can purchase a stock on the rise. Making profit from this was Craig’s only desire. He was accused of using his girlfriend’s online stock broker account to buy the stocks and sell them for a higher price.

Lee is finance major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2018.

Tesla Referral Program May Be Unlawful

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 )

Blog Business Law Archives

Posted by Issam Abualnadi.

Tax is a sum of money levied on incomes, property, sales, etc., by a government for its support or for specific services. (The American Heritage Dictionary). According to the IRS website, the origin of the income tax on individuals is generally cited as the passage of the 16th Amendment, passed by Congress on July 2, 1909, and ratified February 3, 1913; however, history, it actually goes back even further. During the Civil, War Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1861, which included a tax on personal incomes to help pay war expenses. The tax was repealed ten years later. In 1894, however, Congress enacted a flat rate Federal income tax, which was ruled unconstitutional the following year by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court held it was a direct tax not apportioned according to the population of each state.

The 16th amendment, ratified in 1913, removed this objection by allowing the Federal government to tax the income of individuals without regard to the population of each State. (IRS Website). The sole purpose of income tax is based economics and social goals.( Income Tax Fundamentals 1-2). While the government tries to maximize its revenue, at the same time, Congress tries to make the tax law suitable and fair for each individual. Therefore, the tax law not only divides the taxpayers into categories upon their income, but also it allows them to minimize their taxes due by structuring their tax return in different methods. Unfortunately, not every citizen is law-abiding in this respect, and accordingly, some taxpayers break the tax law. In the foregoing, I will discuss the differences between tax avoidance, tax fraud, and tax evasion.    Avoidance of tax is not a criminal offense. According to the IRS, taxpayers have the right to reduce, avoid, or minimize their taxes by legitimate means. One who avoids tax does not conceal or misrepresent, but shapes and preplans events to reduce or eliminate tax liability within the parameters of the law. Take for example, Warren Buffett. Buffett wrote in The New York Times in 2011 “ Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent” ( The New York Times). But how Buffett can do that?

Buffett and many other super rich people use different tax rules to avoid paying taxes, like the “cash-rich split-off.” This code mechanism is used when Company (A) puts cash or other “investment assets” plus a business into a subsidiary that it then swaps tax-free to Company (B) in return for B’s holding of A’s stock. In 2010 Graham Holdings and Berkshire (Warren Buffett’s corporation), saved a total of about $675 million in federal and state income taxes by going the “cash-rich split-off” route. Graham Holdings is trading cash, Berkshire stock that it owns, and a TV station for most of Berkshire’s 23 percent stake in Graham Holdings. Tax avoidance matches the well-known saying, “Work smarter not harder.” Also, it is worth mentioning that massive tax avoidance draws attention to the notion of the efficiency of the tax codes, and the need to produce new rules or restrictions prevent such legal tax evasion. (The New York Times).

Tax fraud is another way some taxpayers use to minimize their tax liability. According to the IRS website, tax fraud “is deception by misrepresentation of material facts, or silence when good faith requires expression, which results in material damage to one who relies on it and has the right to rely on it. Simply stated, it is obtaining something of value from someone else through deceit.” (IRS Section 25.1.1.2). According to IRS’s definition of tax fraud, not all the mistakes in preparing a tax return are considered a fraud, and in order to consider a case as a fraud, two elements should be presented:

  1. An additional tax due and owing as the result of a deliberate intent to evade tax; or

  2. The willful and material submission of false statements or false documents in connection with an application and/or return. (IRS Section 25.1.1.1). Generally the expression “Tax Fraud” used for civil and criminal cases.

The third area is tax evasion. Tax evasion, “Involves some affirmative act to evade or defeat a tax, or payment of tax. Examples of affirmative acts are deceit, subterfuge, camouflage, concealment, attempts to color or obscure events, or make things seem other than they are” (IRS Section 25.1.1.2.4). “It is typically used in the criminal context, and it is a subset of the tax fraud.”

Tax fraud and tax evasion are very close in their meaning; both are illegal way to reduce the tax liability. The IRS indicates tax fraud by two major indicators. The first indicator is when the taxpayer knowingly understates their tax liability often leaving evidence in the form of identifying earmarks. The second indicator is that serve as a sign or symptom, or signify that actions may have been done for the purpose of deceit, concealment or to make things seem other than what they are. Usually the IRS cannot prove that to court, because taxpayer can easily claim a good faith misunderstanding of the law or good faith belief that one is not violating the law negating willfulness. Therefore, the IRS chooses to prosecute the taxpayer civilly for underpaying taxes. In such cases, the IRS can impose a tax fraud penalty, which is 75% of the tax owed plus the interest on this penalty. On the other hand, tax evasion is a subset of tax fraud. In tax evasion cases, the very difficult burden for the IRS is to prove the willfulness, which means a voluntary, intentional violation of a known legal duty. (IRS, Section 25.1.1.1) To prove fraud, they must show the court that the taxpayer did the act deliberately for the purpose of deceit. Examples include omissions of specific items where similar items are included; concealment of bank accounts or other assets. (ISR Section 25.1.1.3). So if the IRS can prove that, then it is a tax evasion case. In tax evasion cases, the penalty range is up to five years in jail plus a big fine and plus the costs of prosecution for each separate tax crime.

In conclusion, the tax law was created to enable the government to support the economical and social activities in the American society. The lawmaker enacted some tax codes to help eligible taxpayers reduce their tax liability under exact conditions, but some still try to deceive the government by using illegal means.

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

Works Cited

“Sixteenth Amendment.” West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. 2008. The Gale Group 17 Nov. 2014. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Sixteenth+Amendment

tax.” The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. 2003. Houghton Mifflin Company 23 Nov. 2014 http://www.thefreedictionary.com/tax

“Brief History of IRS.” Brief History of IRS. Web. 10 Oct. 2014. .

Whittenburg, Gerald E., and Ray Whittington. “The Individual Income Tax Return.” Income Tax Fundamentals. 2014 ed. St. Paul: Cengage Learning, 2014. 1-2. Print.

“Internal Revenue Manual – 25.1.1 Overview/Definitions.” Internal Revenue Manual – 25.1.1 Overview/Definitions. Web. 23 Nov. 2014. .

BUFFETT, WARREN. “Stop Coddling the Super-Rich.” The New York Times 14 Aug. 2011. Web.

Gucci Sues Alibaba Over “Counterfeit Goods”

Posted by Wing Sze Yu.

This article talks about China’s leading online marketplace, Alibaba, being sued by the owner of Gucci, Yves Saint Laurent, Puma, Kering Group, and other fashion brands for selling fake goods. This is not the first time that Alibaba is being complained about selling fake goods. The company states that it is taking action to fight against fake goods on its various websites.

Kering took legal action against Alibaba last, but the case was later dropped. However, Alibaba insisted that “it was enforcing a zero tolerance policy towards fakes.” To help customers to figure out if the products are authentic or not, Alibaba has recently announced a new anti-counterfeit technology. “The firm has announced a tie-up with an Israeli start-up to offer visual markers – similar to but less obtrusive than QR codes – that can be scanned with its Taobao app to prove that goods are genuine. Manufacturers are being invited to add the ‘dotless visual codes’ to their labels to help prove they are authentic.”

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

Chase Settles Lawsuit Over Debt Collection

Posted by Alyssa Cohen.

This year, JPMorgan Chase will settle the charges made against it for the use of illegal debt-collection practices made between 2009 and 2013. The lawsuit follows “a national settlement over similar allegations.” The nation’s largest bank miscalculated the amounts owed by customers, and sold debt to collectors that had been filed improperly against 125,000 Californians. It also obtained default judgment against active military personnel, which is against state and federal laws. While it is not illegal for a bank to attempt to collect overdue debt, the methods used by JPMorgan Chase were unethical and considered illegal by all states, as well as the federal government.

“In addition to other state penalties, Chase will pay $50 million in restitution to customers who were victims of its debt-collection practices.” It also agreed to conditions governing how they can collect or sell consumer debts to outside companies.

It just is not fair to customers who have not been able to notify the bank of their inability to pay. However, I believe that default judgment should be made against customers who were actively avoiding to pay back their debt. Dismissing the lawsuits that were filed improperly was a great sign of the progress that the bank has made to take responsibility for their wrongdoing, as well as not filing “any credit card debt suits against customers” since 2011.

Jumping ahead to filing lawsuits against a bank’s customers will no doubt hurt JPMorgan’s reputation. As with most lawsuits brought by the government, the majority of the fines collected went to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in order to help consumers take control of their own financial decisions. Protecting the consumer by educating and enforcing federal laws can make a great difference in the health of our economy.

Alyssa is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University.