Federal Judge Rejects Trump’s $15M Lawsuit Against NY Times

Donald Trump

A federal judge has rejected Donald Trump’s $15 million lawsuit against the New York Times saying the rambling 85-page complaint violated a federal rule requiring “a short plain statement” of the claim in an attempt to demonstrate that the plaintiff deserves relief. Continue reading “Federal Judge Rejects Trump’s $15M Lawsuit Against NY Times”

Legal Pundits On Trump Lawsuit: ‘The Trap He Created For Himself’

Donald Trump
On Wednesday, Donald Trump sued Twitter, Facebook and Google for banning him from certain websites, claiming they violated his First Amendment rights. According to the Washington Post, the suits allege “that the companies violated Trump’s First Amendment rights in suspending his accounts and argues that Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, which is owned by Google, no longer should be considered private companies but ‘a state actor’ whose actions are constrained by First Amendment restrictions on government limitations on free speech.” Legal experts were quick to point out the U.S. Constitution is clear that the First Amendment constrains only government actions, not those of private companies. The First Amendment reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Bolding is mine. You’ll also notice nowhere in the Constitution is it stated there is a constitutional right to Facebook. Or Twitter. Or YouTube. In an interview with Bill O’Reilly, Trump was told he would have to give a deposition for the legal action to which the Donald said he’d love to talk about the lawsuit, the election and any little thing. But legal pundits say the lawsuit lays its own trap for Trump as he would have to answer many, many, many questions under oath. Keith Olbermann tweeted, “This is the dumbest thing Trump has ever done. It’s wonderful. I remind you from personal experience that when you sue somebody you have to give a multi-day deposition on anything relevant to the topic…in this case, like your role inspiring the 1/6 Coup.”

Former White House counsel John Dean retweeted adding, “This should be a nationally televised deposition…. Please schedule it next week. Don’t move to dismiss, which would be the normal move. Make him deal with the trap he created for himself. He will lose on the merits!”

Starbucks Sued For “Too Much Ice” In Iced Drinks

Seriously.

According to the $5 million dollar lawsuit, filed by Chicago resident Stacy Pincus, Starbucks’ Venti 24 ounce iced drinks often only contain 14 ounces of actual beverage and the rest is ice.

Starbucks responded to the lawsuit today saying the claim is totally unfounded, and that customers are always welcome to have their drink remade at anytime by request.

The lawsuit seeks class-action status, which could allow it to cover customers for the last decade. Among other things, the lawsuit seeks damages, restitution and attorneys’ fees.

Watch ABC News’ report by Gio Benitez (hello recently married hottie):

NJ Man Attempts To Sue Applebees After Burning Face By Praying Over Fajitas

Remember the woman who sued McDonalds some years ago because she put a scalding hot cup of coffee between her legs and blamed the restaurant?

Well, this guy tried a similar tactic, but lost. From the NY Daily News:

Hiram Jimenez claimed a waitress at the Westampton, N.J., restaurant did not tell him the skillet was hot during a 2010 visit with his brother, NJ.com reported.

When the order arrived, he bowed his head in prayer over the entrée and the skillet splashed him with grease in the left eye and face, according to the suit.

Jimenez then knocked the plate onto his lap.

A lower court dismissed the case and a two-judge panel agreed. Applebee’s was not negligent, they ruled.

“Here, the risk of injury was foreseeable since the plate of food, as described by plaintiff, was sizzling, smoking and ‘real hot,’ ” the court concluded in dismissing the suit.

Because, you know, all that sizzling and smoking should be enough to tell you “this thing is hot…”

Truth be told, I do most of my praying after I eat at Applebees.