Other Decisions: Decided
Decided - The FindLaw Noteworthy Decisions and Settlements Blog

Recently in Other Category

I'm not saying I did anything wrong, but here's some money.

A group of investors sued Sprint in a class action lawsuit accusing the company of lying to investors about Sprint's merger with Nextel Communications. Sprint recently agreed to settle the lawsuit and pay $131 million, cash, but denied all liability.

We break down quite a few legal decisions on our blogs, and we post some of them over on Courtside. So when you're looking at a court ruling we've published or reading one issued in a case you're involved in, how do you know what you're looking for?

Courts can publish in different formats and employ a lot of "legalese," so here are a few tips on how to read a court decision.

Remember that massive Target data breach in 2013? Well, some victims may soon be getting a payout for their troubles.

A Minnesota judge has granted preliminary approval of $10 million settlement in a class-action lawsuit against Target. The 2013 data breach may have affected up to 40 million credit and debit card numbers and the personal information of 61 million people. This settlement is in addition to free credit monitoring that Target has already offered its customers.

What does this mean for you? Here's what you need to know:

I've got good news and bad news. The good news: If you've recently gotten one of 24,000 red-light camera tickets in Broward County, Florida, it may have just been dismissed. The bad news: The county just lost about $6.3 million in potential revenue.

Two Broward County judges this week dismissed 24,000 red-light tickets after the red-light camera program was challenged in court for breaking a Florida state law, the ABA Journal reports.

How did so many people get so lucky?

Don't post sexually explicit pictures of a minor on a revenge porn website. Even more importantly, don't ignore the lawsuit when you get sued!

Eric Chanson and Kevin Bollaert, owners of the (now-defunct) revenge porn website YouGotPosted.com, must now pay a $900,000 default judgment to a young girl whose pictures were posted on the site.

What did they do, and what is a default judgment?

Calif.'s Foie Gras Ban Struck Down by Federal Judge

A federal judge has struck down California's ban on foie gras on the grounds that it conflicts with federal poultry regulations.

California's ban on the controversial French delicacy was first signed into law in 2004, taking effect in 2012. But on Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge Stephen Wilson sided with a group of restaurants, foie gras producers, and farmers who argued that the California law was unconstitutional, reports the Los Angeles Times.

What led to the ruling, and what does it mean for foie gras fans in California?

The NTSB has ruled that drones, despite being in a regulatory gray area, are subject to the FAA's rules.

This is a reversal of a National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) judge's ruling in March, which found that the FAA didn't have any legitimate regulations which could touch drone pilots. But on Tuesday, that judge's decision was appealed to the four-member board, which reversed the lower administrative decision and found that drones are indeed "aircraft" under the FAA's regulations.

So with all this back and forth, what should drone pilots know about this NTSB ruling?

AT&T 'Cramming' Settlement: $105M for Bogus Cell-Phone Charges

AT&T has agreed to a $105 million settlement with the Federal Trade Commission over claims that the carrier allegedly charged consumers for unauthorized third-party services and subscriptions through a process called "cramming."

The settlement is the largest to date in the FTC's effort to combat the practice of mobile cramming. Earlier this year, the FTC filed a complaint against T-Mobile alleging that carrier was cramming users' bills with unauthorized third-party charges as well.

What exactly is cramming, and what are the terms of AT&T's cramming settlement?

Guardian Can Remove Life Support Without Court Review in Minn.

The Minnesota Supreme Court has upheld a lower court decision allowing appointed professional guardians to remove patients from life support without a court review.

The case involved Jeffrey Tschumy -- a man incapacitated from diabetes, the effects of a stroke, and partial paralysis from a spinal infection -- who choked on his food and suffered what was determined to be irreversible brain damage, reports Minnesota Public Radio. The man had no family and the professional guardian who'd been appointed nearly three years earlier to make the man's medical decisions asked the hospital to remove him from life support.

The hospital's ethics panel and a district court said that guardians didn't have that decision-making power. But the Minnesota Supreme Court disagreed.

Electric car maker Tesla has gotten the go-ahead from Massachusetts' Supreme Judicial Court, which ruled Monday that a state law couldn't be used to stop Tesla from selling cars.

The Massachusetts State Automobile Dealers Association had tried to bar Tesla from selling its premium electric cars at an upscale mall in Natick, under a law that prevents manufacturers from owning and operating dealerships. But the high court disagreed.

The Boston Globe reports that Tesla is facing similar restrictive laws in Texas, Arizona, and Maryland. So how did Tesla manage to win in Massachusetts?