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.