Quote

Attorneys for the Cinemark theater chain want victims of a 2012 shooting at a Colorado movie theater to pay nearly $700,000 in legal fees after they unsuccessfully sued the company.

The company's lawyers told a judge they need the money to cover the costs of preserving evidence, retrieving and copying records, travel and other expenses, according to court documents filed this month.

A judge didn't immediately rule on the request. But Colorado courts allow the winning side of a court case to recover legal fees.

Jurors in May ruled in Cinemark's favor over 28 victims and their families who argued the nation's third-largest theater chain should have done more to prevent the attack that killed 12 people and left more than 70 others injured.

They sued in state court, saying security lapses allowed for the July 20, 2012 attack at a midnight premiere of a "The Dark Night Rises," a Batman film, in Aurora, Colo.

A judge last week dismissed a similar lawsuit in federal court, saying Cinemark's lack of security was not a substantial factor in the deaths.

In both lawsuits, victims cited a lack of guards and no alarm on an emergency exit door that would have sounded when James Holmes slipped into the crowded theater and started shooting.

Cinemark argued it could not have foreseen the attack, and nothing could have stopped the heavily armed Holmes. Lawyers for the plaintiffs in the state case have said they are considering appealing the verdict.

Holmes is serving a life sentence after a different group of jurors could not unanimously agree on whether he deserved to die.

Quote, Originally Posted by OAW (Post 4360628)

You really can't make this sh*t up! :eek:

Quote, Originally Posted by design219 (Post 4360673)

Probably will get them more than $700,000 in bad PR.

Questionable business move at the least. Morally for sure.

Quote, Originally Posted by turtle777 (Post 4360652)

Completely disagree.

You sue someone frivolously, and lose, you pay their fees.

If this was the general rule, you would not have all these lawsuits in the US.

-t

Quote

Spotify says Apple is making it harder for the streaming music company to compete by blocking a new version of its iPhone app.

In a letter sent this week to Apple’s top lawyer, Spotify says Apple is “causing grave harm to Spotify and its customers” by rejecting an update to Spotify’s iOS app.

The letter says Apple turned down a new version of the app while citing “business model rules” and demanded that Spotify use Apple’s billing system if “Spotify wants to use the app to acquire new customers and sell subscriptions.”

The letter, sent by Spotify general counsel Horacio Gutierrez to Apple general counsel Bruce Sewell on June 26, suggests that Spotify intends to use the standoff as ammunition in its fight over Apple’s rules governing subscription services that use its App store. (Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly reported the date Spotify sent the letter.)

“This latest episode raises serious concerns under both U.S. and EU competition law,” Gutierrez wrote. “It continues a troubling pattern of behavior by Apple to exclude and diminish the competitiveness of Spotify on iOS and as a rival to Apple Music, particularly when seen against the backdrop of Apple’s previous anticompetitive conduct aimed at Spotify … we cannot stand by as Apple uses the App Store approval process as a weapon to harm competitors.”

Quote, Originally Posted by OAW (Post 4360676)

Generally speaking I agree. I just don't know if I would characterize this particular situation as "frivolous" given the non-functioning alarm on the emergency exits.

OAW

Quote, Originally Posted by OAW (Post 4364643)

^^^
So let me ask you this. If a fire had broken out and the fire alarms weren't functioning and people ended up dead. That would also be a tragedy. Would you feel the same way if the family members of the dead sued?
OAW

Quote, Originally Posted by andi*pandi (Post 4364583)

Maine Gov. LePage has left a curse-laden voicemail to a legislator, among other things challenging him to a duel. This over being called a racist.

audio link at press herald:

'Prove I'm a racist': LePage challenges Westbrook lawmaker in obscenity-laced voice mail - The Portland Press Herald / Maine Sunday Telegram

Quote, Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants (Post 4364616)

In today's PC political climate it's nearly as bad as saying someone's a child molester.

Quote, Originally Posted by BadKosh (Post 4364700)

Clemson University Administrator Stops Man From Praying on Campus "This isn't a free speech area." (VIDEO)

Quote, Originally Posted by andi*pandi (Post 4364583)

Maine Gov. LePage has left a curse-laden voicemail to a legislator, among other things challenging him to a duel. This over being called a racist.

Quote

It happens from time to time across Kentucky. A candidate is elected to office or someone is chosen to lead a public university. Typically, a judge and honoree stand facing each other, right hands raised. The judge recites the oath of office with its words proudly repeated.

Then comes this reference: "I, being a citizen of this State, have not fought a duel with deadly weapons within this State nor out of it, nor have I sent or accepted a challenge to fight a duel with deadly weapons, nor have I acted as second in carrying a challenge, nor aided or assisted any person thus offending, so help me God."

Quote, Originally Posted by Jawbone54 (Post 4364835)

[EDIT] Kentucky still has to make sure its elected officials have never been involved in duels...

Quote, Originally Posted by reader50 (Post 4364845)

This is discriminatory to people who win duels - people who lose a dual could not show up to take their oaths.

Actually, I see no reason for that term. Come on - who wouldn't want to elect a badass into office. :)

Quote, Originally Posted by Jawbone54 (Post 4364834)

Honestly, at what point are college campuses going to just honestly say, "Christian thought — especially conservative Christian thought — is not welcome here." Just make it official.

Quote, Originally Posted by Jawbone54 (Post 4364835)

Sometimes I forget that duels were once a legitimate, respectable thing for American gentlemen.

Quote, Originally Posted by Jawbone54 (Post 4364835)

Sometimes I forget that duels were once a legitimate, respectable thing for American gentlemen.

[EDIT] Kentucky still has to make sure its elected officials have never been involved in duels...

Quote, Originally Posted by The Final Dakar (Post 4364855)

Southern gentleman maybe. When Burr and Hamilton did their thing it was illegal in NY and NJ.

Quote, Originally Posted by The Final Dakar (Post 4364855)

Southern gentleman maybe. When Burr and Hamilton did their thing it was illegal in NY and NJ.

Quote

California and federal regulators fined Wells Fargo a combined $185 million on Thursday, alleging the bank's employees illegally opened millions of unauthorized accounts for their customers in order to meet aggressive sales goals.

A staggering 5,300 employees at Wells Fargo were fired in connection with this behavior, according to the Los Angeles City Attorney's office.

The San Francisco-based bank will pay $100 million to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a federal agency created five years ago; $35 million to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and $50 million to the City and County of Los Angeles. It will also pay restitution to affected customers.

It is the largest fine the CFPB has levied against a financial institution and the largest fine in the history of the Los Angeles City Attorney's office.

The CFPB said Wells Fargo sales staff opened more than 2 million bank and credit card accounts that may have not been authorized by customers. Money in customers' accounts were transferred to these new accounts without authorization. Debit cards were issued and activated, as well as PINs created, without telling customers.

In some cases, Wells Fargo employees even created fake email addresses to sign up customers for online banking services.

"Wells Fargo built an incentive-compensation program that made it possible for its employees to pursue underhanded sales practices, and it appears that the bank did not monitor the program carefully," said CFPB Director Richard Cordray.

The behavior was widespread, the CFPB and other regulators said, involving thousands of Wells Fargo employees.

Los Angeles City Attorney Mike Feuer called Wells Fargo's behavior "outrageous" and a "major breach of trust."

"Consumers must be able to trust their banks," Feuer said.

Wells Fargo's aggressive sales tactics were first disclosed by The Los Angeles Times in an investigation in 2013. The story series prompted the Los Angeles City Attorney office to sue Wells Fargo over its tactics.

In a statement, Wells Fargo said: "We regret and take responsibility for any instances where customers may have received a product that they did not request." Wells Fargo said they've refunded $2.6 million in fees associated with any product that was opened without authorization.

Despite the LA Times investigation, Wells Fargo is still known for having aggressive sales goals for its employees. Wells Fargo's executives highlight every quarter the bank's so-called "cross sale ratio," which is the number of products the bank sales to each of their individual customers. The ratio hovers around six, which means every customer of Wells Fargo has on average six different types of products with the bank

Quote

After hanging up mid-sentence on a caller, a Houston 911 call center operator was heard on a recording saying, "Ain't nobody got time for this. For real," according to charging documents.

That call center operator identified as Crenshanda Williams was arrested and charged after allegedly hanging up on what could be thousands of emergency callers, according to the documents.

The 43-year-old had been placed under police investigation after her supervisors noticed that she had an abnormally large number of calls that lasted less than 20 seconds.

A review of the Houston Emergency Center database found that "thousands of short calls have been attributed to the defendant" from October 2015 to March 2016.

When interviewed by Houston Police in June, Williams allegedly told officers she often hung up on calls because she did not want to talk to anyone at that time. She was charged with interference with an emergency telephone call, which is a misdemeanor.

Williams does not have an attorney listed in the court documents and did not respond to CNN's request for comment.

She's scheduled for a court appearance next week, according to CNN affiliate KPRC.

Quote, Originally Posted by andi*pandi (Post 4368404)

Or perhaps she thought she was working in Comcast customer service, not 911?

Quote, Originally Posted by andi*pandi (Post 4368404)

Or perhaps she thought she was working in Comcast customer service, not 911?

Quote, Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants (Post 4368603)

Supposition: Prison has never rehabilitated a single child molester, it only makes them worse when they're eventually released (if they survive)

Quote, Originally Posted by Laminar (Post 4368627)

I don't think this is unique to child molesters.

Quote, Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV (Post 4368631)

Who ever though prison would rehabilitate someone was an idiot. Prison is an "if you go here your life is ruined so don't do it." If your life is already ruined then prison doesn't do anything.