Posted by Elizabeth Fernandez.

This article discusses a lawsuit against Panera for their highly caffeinated beverages that took the life of a UPenn college student. In September 2022, Sarah Kratz passed away because of what seemed to be no reason. Later it was found Kratz had a large charged lemonade from Panera which, “contains more caffeine than standard cans of Red Bull and Monster energy drinks combined, as well as the equivalent of almost 30 teaspoonfuls of sugar,” as said by Elizabeth Chuck. It was found that a large lemonade contains about 390 milligrams of caffeine and the regulated maximum “safe” amount of caffeine to consume is 400 milligrams daily. In the Panera Café Kratz went to before she passed, there was no major warning stating how much caffeine was in the charged lemonade or any mention of guarana extract, which is another stimulant that has similar effects to caffeine.

The reason why this death is becoming a big lawsuit is because Sarah Kratz had a pre-existing heart condition where she knew she should avoid large amounts of caffeine. As said by Sarah’s friend from Penn, “I guarantee if Sarah had known how much caffeine this was, she never would have touched it with a 10-foot pole.”, showing how cautious Kratz was about her heart condition. Panera’s failure to disclose the ingredients and caffeine levels in its charged drinks is the main issue in this lawsuit. At the Panera Cafes, the charged lemonades are put close to the regular fountain machine with drinks that have low to no caffeine. The charged lemonades are also very close to some of Panera’s regular lemonades and teas that are low in caffeine and are advertised as being “natural” and “clean”.

In my opinion, the Kratz family has every right to go through with the lawsuit, and Panera is in the wrong. Since Panera knew how much caffeine was in the drinks they were serving, they obviously knew how dangerous consuming high levels of caffeine is. Panera should have created a warning on the drink dispenser saying how much caffeine is in each cup size and a list of ingredients. As Chuck mentioned, Panera should discourage refills of the charged drinks to prevent overconsumption of caffeine because that could lead to serious health issues.  

Elizabeth is a marketing major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2026.

Work Cited

Chuck, Elizabeth. “Panera Now Displaying Warning about Its Caffeinated Lemonade in All Stores after Lawsuit over Customer’s Death.” CNBC, CNBC, 29 Oct. 2023, www.cnbc.com/2023/10/29/panera-now-displaying-warning-about-its-caffeinated-lemonade-in-all-stores-after-lawsuit-over-customers-death.html.

Posted by Diego Fernandez.

SpaceX, the aerospace company founded by Elon Musk, has initiated a legal counterattack against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), filing a lawsuit in a Texas federal court. This action is in response to the DOJ’s allegations of hiring discrimination by SpaceX against refugees and individuals granted asylum in the United States. The lawsuit challenges the DOJ’s case on constitutional grounds, marking a significant legal battle between a private company and a federal agency.

In its countersuit, SpaceX vehemently denies engaging in any discriminatory hiring practices. The company’s position, as articulated by its legal counsel Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, asserts that SpaceX is committed to hiring the most qualified candidates for every job, irrespective of their citizenship status. The company highlights its track record of hiring hundreds of noncitizens, affirming its inclusive employment practices.

Central to this legal dispute is the question of who SpaceX can employ under military technology regulations, particularly the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and the Export Administration Regulations. SpaceX argues that every employee within the company has access to technology and data governed by these statutory and regulatory frameworks. This contention underscores the complexity of the issue and its relevance to national security.

SpaceX’s rapid growth over the years is exemplified by its employment of more than 13,000 individuals across the United States. The company reveals that its job postings routinely receive a substantial number of applications, with an average of over 90 applications per posting and even more for engineering positions. This competitive hiring process, the company claims, is more selective than prestigious U.S. colleges, resulting in an acceptance rate of about 1%. The Department of Justice commenced its investigation into SpaceX in June 2020, prompted by a complaint of employment discrimination from a non-U.S. citizen. This investigation ultimately led to the DOJ’s legal action against the company, alleging unfair hiring practices.

In conclusion, SpaceX’s countersuit against the Department of Justice marks a significant legal battle with potentially far-reaching implications. The company vehemently denies any wrongdoing and is committed to defending its hiring practices on constitutional grounds. As the case unfolds, it will shed light on the intersection of national security regulations, immigration, and employment practices in the context of the aerospace industry. The outcome of this lawsuit will be closely watched by both legal experts and industry observers.

Diego is a marketing major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/09/20/spacex-countersues-doj-in-hiring-discrimination-case.htmlLinks to an external site.

Posted by Tyler Fernandes.

The article that I will be discussing is the article, “Trump wanted to trademark “Rigged Election” and other key findings from Jan.6 panels latest release” (CNN). I am a sophomore (2026) from Harrison, Nj that is looking to major in finance and accounting. Getting back to the article, it begins with the overview of the incident on January 6 and talks about the committee probe into this day. One key witness into this probe was Clearence Thomas’ wife which through reveled texts, contacted Trump to question election results. Another key piece of evidence in this trial was the account of a witness in Trump’s motorcade. This provided them with the authority, now having more credible information, to go along with the trial. Not only did this provide the party on offence which were the democrats to gain favorability, it also discredited the Republican party and its ideas.

The next part that the article goes into would be the very action that Trump wanted to trademark “rigged election”. Emails regarding this from Jared Kushner prove this to be a worthy and credible source for this information. Kusherner’s testimony, said the following, “Hey Jared! POTUS wants to trademark/own rights to below, I don’t know who to see – or ask…I don’t know who to take to” (CNN). This shows the credibility of Trump’s actions and not just words circulating around the media. Several other phrases also wanted to be trademarked including “Save America PAC”, in which Kusher also wrote, “Guys – can we do ASAP please?” (CNN). While this has little to no importance to the January 6 hearings, it also seems to further put the idea forward to Americans that former President Trump wanted “something to take with him” when he left office. In my opinion, I do not think this information should be mainstream to this extent as it does not prove or disprove his hearings.

As Trump’s lawyers at the time of this unruly period, tried to find a way and protect him from the Democratic party it became increasingly challenging to keep it hidden within the American eye. Whether it was the Russian collusion, January 6th, or even Covid, the misinformation and different opinions floating around within the media and the country, made it hard for the voters to hold a common interest with now the former president. Whilst in office president Trump overcome many obstacles including the ones mentioned, but found a way to make the country economically and politically safer.

Tyler is a finance major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2026.

Works Cited

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/30/politics/january-6-transcript-release-latest/index.html

Posted by Derek Diskant.

This article talks about artificial intelligence and the laws and regulations that should be put into place. Different parts of artificial intelligence are creating problems for law and society. For example, it mentions that “Generative AI creates not only new text, code, audio, or video, but problems with deepfakes, plagiarism, and falsehoods presented as convincing facts” (Theodore Claypoole). There are people that don’t understand how to use artificial intelligence responsibly and effectively. Instead, some people abuse it for what it can do and don’t understand the problems with that. The article states, “We need to think differently about AI before determining how to treat it” (Theodore Claypoole). Bad things could happen if people don’t think about AI differently and don’t consider the problems it could cause. Rules and regulations must be put in place to prevent these kinds of things from happening. However, the article mentions that “Passing a law to “restrict artificial intelligence” is a dangerous exercise under current definitions” (Theodore Claypoole). A law that restricts the use of artificial intelligence should not be passed because AI still has so much potential and is very beneficial. The article is trying to say that there needs to be laws and regulations put in place to prevent the problems artificial intelligence can cause and what people use it for instead.

The article talks about different categories of artificial intelligence and how they should be used. It proposes a list of different categories, which is meant to persuade legislators and regulators to consider the potential of artificial intelligence and help them make effective rules and laws. It mentions “Some of these lines blur, and certain technical or social problems are shared across classifications, but thinking of current AI solutions in legally significant functional categories will simplify effective rulemaking” (Theodore Claypoole). This should be taken into consideration because artificial intelligence could have a huge impact on the world. The different categories of artificial intelligence include Automating AI, Generative AI, Physical Action AI, Strategizing AI, Decisioning AI, Personal Identification AI, Differentiating AI, and Military AI. These kinds of artificial intelligence are used for different reasons and are meant to have a positive impact on the world, but in a safe manner. The article also mentions “The above categorizations provide a safer place to start if we wish to regulate a vast shifting technology. By adopting this thinking, AI management becomes less daunting and more effective” (Theodore Claypoole). This proposal is a great place to start if we want artificial intelligence to have a huge impact. It also provides a safe environment and ensures that effective laws are put in place to prevent anything bad from happening.

Overall, I agree that there should be laws and regulations put in place to prevent the problems that artificial intelligence can bring. These problems can include deepfakes, plagiarism, potential harm, taking over or replacing people’s jobs, etc. There are also people that abuse AI and take it for granted instead of using it responsibly. If people don’t use it responsibly, then bad things could happen and there are consequences that follow. However, I also agree that passing a law that restricts the use of artificial intelligence would be a bad idea because AI still has a lot of potential and can positively impact the world. There is still a lot to learn from AI and it can dramatically benefit people’s lives in so many ways. There are different types of AI’s, each having different uses and their own benefits. To stop the problems artificial intelligence can cause, there must be certain laws and regulations put in place to prevent these things from happening, while allowing AI to be used responsibly for any situation. I believe that this would be a great start because it allows us to use AI as a second-hand tool. While these different rules and regulations apply, AI can be used responsibly and as a second-hand tool to help us with any kind of situation. Furthermore, I agree that having effective laws put in place to stop the problems or harm artificial intelligence can bring would provide a safe environment for people to use it responsibly and effectively, and be served as a tool when necessary.

Derek is a finance major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2025.

Work Cited

Claypoole, Theodore. “AI Classifications for Law and Regulations.” American Bar Association Business Law Section, 15 September 2023, https://businesslawtoday.org/2023/09/ai-classifications-for-law-and-regulation/Links to an external site.

Posted by Nasser Coutinho.

The closure of the McDonalds on Front Street in downtown San Francisco signifies more than just the shutdown of a fast food outlet. It serves as a testament to the transformations occurring in urban areas following the COVID-19 pandemic. Having been in operation for thirty years, this establishment ultimately fell victim to the shifts within its surroundings. According to Scott Rodrick, from Rodrick Management Group “The economics of running a franchised restaurant in San Francisco continue to be a challenge” due to the high vacancy rates of downtown office buildings and the slow resurgence of tourism (Aitken, 2023). It’s clear from the article that the closure was not a matter of if, but when, as the “level of vibrancy” necessary to sustain such businesses has diminished since the pandemic (Aitken, 2023).

In a city once teeming with office workers and tourists, the quieted streets and empty offices have created an unsustainable situation for businesses that thrived on foot traffic. The decision to close was likened to a “gut punch” by Rodrick, a sentiment that underscores the distress many business owners feel as they navigate the post-pandemic economy (Aitken, 2023). The shift in the commercial real estate market is palpable, with properties changing hands at “steep discount” and a “full-on buyer’s market” emerging, revealing the extent of the economic downturn in these urban areas (Aitken, 2023).

The new wage law in California, which aims to increase the minimum wage for fast food workers to $20 by April 2024, is posing challenges for businesses like McDonalds. Chris Kempczinski, the CEO of McDonalds has voiced his concerns about the impact this will have on franchisee operations. “there will certainly be a hit in the short term to franchisee cash flow in California” (Aitken, 2023). These ongoing difficulties demonstrate the equilibrium between guaranteeing wages for employees and upholding a thriving business atmosphere in cities such as San Francisco, where the past vitality of the economy appears to be fading further away.

Nasser is a business student at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2025.

Article Link: https://www.foxbusiness.com/fox-news-food-drink/downtown-san-francisco-mcdonalds-location-closes-30-years-not-recovered-pandemic

Posted by Angelina Carlisle.

There has been debate going around about whether or not social media companies are a result of the increase in mental health issues amongst the youth. Now, there are numerous laws that defend against this allegation, specifically Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects online platforms from what content is posted by its users and if these platforms decide to take it down. But if a company takes the content created by its users to target specific groups of people, particularly children and teens, preying off their insecurities and time to profit off them, it could be seen as a possible violation of this law.

An article posted by Fox Business discusses how several states across America are putting together a lawsuit to protect the mental well being of teens and children from these large companies.

“The lawsuit, which involves at least 32 states so far, alleges Meta “misled its users and the public by boasting a low prevalence of harmful content,” while being “keenly aware” its platforms’ features “cause young users significant physical and mental harm.” The filing says that Meta’s recommendation algorithm promotes “compulsive use,” which the company does not disclose. The lawsuit claims that social comparison features like “Likes” promote mental health harms for young users, while visual filters are known to promote body dysmorphia and eating disorders.” (Fox Business).

Therefore, social media companies are allegedly posting content to make people feel more self conscious of how they look and feel about themselves. But it also targets them socially, these platforms revolve around the mission to help create new connections, as well as strengthen new ones with people from anywhere around the world which increases the amount of time users spend on its platforms, but also means more money for these corporate giants.

Cases like these question the ethics of business and the effectiveness of the laws of Capitalism. For instance, it is seen to be unethical to sell someone a product you know does not work for your own profit, and depending on the product can scam them out of their money or potentially put them at risk. But under the ethics of Capitalism, that could be viewed as a flaw of the consumer for not knowing enough about the product they are purchasing to see it was a flop. Nowadays, this type of behavior is rewarded and we see it occur more often within big pharma. To put into perspective a pharmaceutical company send out medication with either lack of research/testing and being well aware of what will happen to the consumer by taking their product, but instead of their message saying “This will help cure you of illness A, B, and C”, it says “This might help cure you of illness A, B, and C”, therefore making them aware of their drug not working as promised, but making them less liable for the outcomes of its failure. So by the time a lawsuit comes around, all they will have to do, if that, is pay a small fine and might possibly have to take their product off of the market.

The point is social media companies work the same way. They promise you a fun, personalized experience, by collecting your personal information and feeding it to their algorithm in which case you are acknowledging and giving it permission to do so by accepting the terms and agreements in the beginning of the app. At this point you know that you could be setting yourself up to potentially being hooked into using the app, and are willingly sacrificing your time to use it. If and when it is brought to the companies attention of the potential downsides of this product, such as the increase in mental health issues of children, they can alter their code to help lessen this issue. But when the issue is addressed in court, they can make an argument stating that the user willingly accepted to use this app, acknowledging that it will be collecting personal information about its user to make it a more unique and enjoyable experience, and therefore cannot be held responsible for the amount of time users spend on the app. They can also turn around and blame it on the parents for not placing time restrictions on their children’s devices, which are available for them to use.

It is possible that we have hit a point in history where capitalism has hit its peak, by finding small loopholes within the areas of business law and business ethics to make the company either less liable or entirely unreliable for their attempt to misguide the promise it has made to its consumers. It will be intriguing to find out what happens to the case against Meta as if they will be found liable of promoting content which causes mental health issues to children and teens; it can be a huge turning point in the history of technology, business law, and how our personal information is being collected.

Angelina is a student at Seton Hall University, Class of 2025.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/dozens-states-sue-meta-alleging-social-media-profoundly-altered-mental-social-realties-american-youth

Posted by Avery Smith

This is the Business Law breakdown and today I will be talking about the article After a year in FTX’s shadow, the crypto industry is delighting in Bankman-Fried’s conviction written by Allison Morrow of CNN. The article was updated on Saturday November 4th, 2023. It is about the downfall of FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried, who was recently convicted for fraud after it was found that the crypto company was based on fraud. The company has gone bankrupt and some say that the findings have sent the once trending crypto community back a few years. 

With the recent conviction of Bankman-Fried the most interesting part the article had pointed out is that “No one is happier about that than the professionals in the industry that made him, for a time, a rock star.”. This specific quote brings out how everything changed with findings of fraud. It’s very serious in the world of business especially crypto as it shows that the company wasn’t ethical as one thought. Crypto is struggling now after with questions about what is being done with money and where it is coming from. The SEC has attacked FTX with hostility lately even with the company filing for bankruptcy as that is the way it will attack digital currency for now on because of the unknown. 

This article was very interesting to me based on the fact that I remember how significant the news was when FTX initially had been called for fraud. FTX had multiple celebrities that were advertising it as well so the name was familiar. With this being non-ethical Bankman-Fried being convicted for fraud makes sense as he didn’t follow appropriate laws or clean funding. It sends things into an unknown for the Crypto community of how it will be able to grow with situations such as these the reason why it might not be able too.

Article link: https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/04/business/crypto-industry-bankman-fried-guilty/index.htmlLinks to an external site.

Avery is a sports management major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2026.

Posted by Navith Rangel

It is no secret that the FTX debacle has been rather scandalous to say the least. Defrauding millionaires and enlisting in A-List celebrities to promote his cryptocurrency, Sam Bankman-Fried definitely did not think that being convicted of fraud was in his list of possibilities. Oftentimes in America, white collar crime goes unpunished, but in the case of Bankman-Fried, this is a twisted and conniving tale. The article that I decided to choose details the case and provides background knowledge surrounding Bankman-Fried, especially his pretrial antics.

FTX was a company that had a meteoric rise, confiding in the likes of Tom Brady and Stephen Curry to help promote this new cryptocurrency. However, just as fast as the rise, the collapse began and it turned out that this new cryptocurrency was actually broke, and could not pay their investors. As a result, the company went bankrupt and all fingers got pointed to founder Bankman-Fried, as the alleged exuberant amount of money being made just somehow disappeared. In turn, Bankman-Fried was then indicted on fraud charges and put behind bars for his crimes. In the article it details that Bankman-Fried performed multiple “antics” which ultimately will haunt him following this massive sentencing. After being arrested in the Bahamas last December, the article states, “The FTX co-founder has ‘shown a willingness and a desire to risk crossing the line in an effort to get right up to it, no matter where the line is,’ Kaplan said during a July hearing. Prosecutors had previously raised concerns about Bankman-Fried’s use of encrypted messaging app Signal to contact FTX’s US general counsel and suggest they “vet things together.” Kaplan called it an attempt at witness tampering” (Bultman 2023). These wild tactics thus has put Bankman-Fried into hot water with prosecutors and the judge and can ultimately affect his final sentencing. The enormous amounts of money additionally tied into the case can also result in a bloated sentencing and the article predicts it to be the maximum amount of life sentences. The article then compares this case with other high-profile white collar crime cases and the sentencing given out. In the case of Enron and their CEO Jeffrey Skilling, he was sentenced to 24 years, but after an appeal was brought down to 14 years. Another example the article uses is the case of Bernie Madoff and his billion dollar Ponzi scheme which yielded a sentencing of 150 years, the maximum. By bringing up these examples, the article’s author helps paint the sentencing picture and try to predict where Bankman-Fried could fall after all this.

Ultimately, I chose this blog post for the mere fact of the refreshing sight of a millionaire being held accountable for their crimes. Too often have we seen white collar criminals get off with lenient sentences and Bankman-Fried’s condescending and smug actions have resulted in him now paying the price. Although at the end of the article it states that the Judge presiding over the case has no empirical basis and in many cases has given lenient sentences, I have no doubt in my mind that Bankman-Fried will most likely see close to a maximum sentence. The high profile nature of the case and the amount of money lost, culminated with Bankman-Fried not doing himself any favors with his antics, the sentencing should be a lengthy one.

Navith is a political science major at the College of Arts and Sciences, Seton Hall University, Class of 2024.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/securities-law/bankman-frieds-pre-trial-antics-haunt-him-before-sentencing-1Links to an external site.

Posted by Alessia Goncalves

Several leading US teaching hospitals are under scrutiny due to allegations made by doctors about a risky practice: surgeons scheduling multiple operations simultaneously and then billing Medicare for work they didn’t do. These claims have emerged from various federal and state lawsuits, shedding light on concurrent surgeries, bribery, kickbacks, and improper compensation. Hospitals such as the University of Southern California’s hospital system and the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center have been accused of leaving patients unattended during critical parts of surgeries, leading to concerns about patient safety and ethical standards.

Concurrent surgeries involve surgeons delegating tasks to residents without adequate supervision, breaching Medicare rules that require the lead surgeon to be present during crucial stages of an operation. Allegations suggest that surgeons often leave the operating room to perform other procedures, sometimes in different facilities. Hospitals are accused of manipulating billing records and engaging in fraudulent practices to maximize profits, putting patients at risk in the process. “At a teaching hospital, you have to make sure they are ready to do surgery on their own at the end of five years,” said Dr. Seth Leopold, professor of orthopedics and sports medicine at the University of Washington. “There has to be a progression, to let somebody have the stick at a certain point, but you have to be in the room observing and training them, both for their sake and the patient’s. I watched them like a hawk” (Holland, 5).

The issue gained prominence with lawsuits against Massachusetts General Hospital, where orthopedic surgeons voiced concerns about overlapping surgeries leading to unnecessary procedures and patient risks. Healthcare professionals at various hospitals, including Erlanger Health System and USC Keck Hospital, have faced repercussions for raising these concerns, resulting in legal battles and wrongful termination lawsuits. These cases, filed under the False Claims Act, highlight the need for transparency, accountability, and adherence to medical ethics in healthcare institutions. Upholding ethical standards is essential to ensuring patient safety and maintaining the integrity of the medical profession.

Article Link: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/doctors-ghost-patients-charge-for-surgeries-left-to-residents

Alessia is a finance major at the Stillman School of Business, Seton Hall University, Class of 2026.

Posted by Maria J. Gomez.

In a world where Artificial Intelligence is taking a big hit and influencing many fields, I don’t believe that many thought it would also take on the legal field. For some context, after the AI scared many by showing how easily it could come up with well acquired things within seconds, it scared the people, but most definitely the working force. Given that for the longest time we have lived in a society where one of the major potential conflicts is being overruled by artificially run robots. That being said, many thought that with the new implementation of AI the world would shift drastically from a workforce mostly led by humans, to a workforce that would simply be made up of technological machinery and AI. Although that has not happened as soon as people expected it to, it does not necessarily mean that it is still out of the picture. And now, seeing that it is possible for it to take over the legal field where it is mostly led by the “exercise of professional judgment and interpersonal engagement” it has been proven, as it is said in this article, that AI can do the same (Magdinier).

This article explains how there are four professional competencies for lawyers and any professional that can be narrowed down to. They are the following: knowledge being in the center core, judgment, content creation and persuasion. Looking at each one individually, knowledge covers the applicable laws and regulations, as well as the client’s business and their market and industry practice. After knowledge comes judgment, or the ability of a person to make the right decisions around things such as content look and feel, interpersonal and organizational dynamics and how to balance commercial and operational drivers. Later on comes content creation which are things like the writings made, graphic slideshows, spreadsheets with statistics, etc.. Lastly, comes persuasion. According to what Magdinier stated in the article, persuasion is and has “always been the lawyer’s superpower. Persuasion is the competency that executes with maximum effectiveness the delivery of all that knowledge, judgment, and content.” 

Now, where does Artificial Intelligence come into play? And how exactly can a digital machine create arguments that carry such humane characteristics? At the current moment, AI excels at the performance of knowledge and content creation; however, it is expected that it will increase its performance on the rest of the competencies. The reason for this is because of how fast the datasets grow and the way that service providers and practitioners invest in the design and build of new use cases. If the situation keeps progressing the way it seems, soon enough AI systems will be able to” accumulate, organize, summarize, extract, and pattern-shift information…” that will “…augment how lawyers come to form their judgements and the tools available for persuasion” (Magdinier). Ultimately, the article ends on advice given to the younger upcoming lawyers. It claimed that those who are entering a world of AI-enabled lawyering, should consider thinking about the current limitations of generative AI tools and use that to their advantage. It ends it by saying that AI is not self-aware and it doesn’t exercise its own judgment. Therefore, it has no idea what a person intends to do with the outputs that a person gives them. Yet, its ability to inform a person’s judgment and enhance their persuasiveness will definitely transform the law field moving forward. 

Maria is a student in the College of Arts and Sciences at Seton Hall University.

https://setonhall.instructure.com/courses/6067/discussion_topics/11406?module_item_id=78113