As the novel coronavirus (or COVID-19) continues to spread, the World Health Organization officially declared it a pandemic on March 11, 2020. Less than a week later, Mayor Turner ordered the closure of Houston restaurants and bars to encourage “social distancing” in an attempt to stop the spread of the virus. We continue to see the…
Companies like Uber and Lyft make it easier for the average person to get from point “A” to point “B” whenever necessary. Ridesharing has become so ubiquitous, in fact, that it can be easy to take this convenience for granted. If your car needs repairs, for example, you can simply whip out your phone and get a ride back to the office in minutes, or if you’re out on the town with friends it’s almost second nature to hail an Uber after a few drinks rather than risk driving yourself. However, this ease of use isn’t as readily available to many people who are disabled and rely on wheelchair accessible transportation.
Apple and its chip-making partner, Qualcomm, have been locked in a bitter legal battle for over two years with millions of dollars at stake between the two companies. Though the partnership provided a major source of revenue for Qualcomm, with the entity earning money for each iPhone sold, its relationship with Apple has gone south following several lawsuits between the two.
The New England Patriots may have won the 2019 Super Bowl, but there’s one Super Bowl fight that’s just started brewing. MillerCoors has filed a lawsuit against Anheuser-Busch (the maker of Bud Light) over a commercial that first appeared during the Super Bowl. Because neither one of these beer giants has yet to back down, it’s likely the lawsuit will end up being a hard fought and expensive battle.
Two tiny words are going to have a huge impact on small public-sector employment litigation and perhaps private sector employers across the country. The Supreme Court of The United States (SCOTUS) recently decided the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) applies much more broadly than previously applied based on the words “also means.” The court’s ruling will likely lead to an increase in age discrimination lawsuits.