Tag Archives: plaintiffs

Business

3 more plaintiffs join class action against American Express alleging discrimination toward White employees

Leave a comment

Three more plaintiffs have joined a class-action lawsuit filed in August alleging that American Express subjected White employees to “racially discriminatory” policies that fostered a hostile work environment.

“Since the filing of this lawsuit my firm has been inundated with calls from former and current Amex employees from all around the country who read the allegations of the complaint and couldn’t believe how accurately they described their own experiences with the company,” attorney David Pivtorak told FOX Business.

On Aug. 23, Pivtorak filed a class action on behalf of former Amex employee Brian Netzel and potentially thousands of other similarly situated employees following what the complaint described as “an avalanche of bad things coming to White people in that company once George Floyd was killed.”

The lawsuit alleges that Amex implemented “anti-racism” policies throughout its corporate structure in the wake of Floyd’s death that “gave preferential treatment to individuals for being Black and unambiguously signaled to White employees that their race was an impediment to getting ahead in the company.”

AMERICAN EXPRESS SLAPPED WITH LAWSUIT ALLEGING DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WHITE EMPLOYEES

In an amended complaint, three new class representative plaintiffs allege discrimination similar to that which Netzel described.

Netzel told FOX Business at the time his complaint was filed that Amex’s racial policies flooded the workplace with “a tremendous amount of animosity.” He alleged White employees were unfairly punished or passed over for promotions, while some Black employees were promoted merely to meet racial quotas, and that some felt empowered to “root out in McCarthy-era fashion people who didn’t agree with this overall philosophy.”

Stocks in this Article

In his original complaint, Netzel alleged that his female manager, who is Black, would “aggressively harass and berate White employees” and that Amex was not only aware of her behavior but provided financial incentives to executives to reduce the number of White employees.

Three new class representative plaintiffs have joined a class-action lawsuit alleging that American Express engaged in racially discriminatory policies against White employees, fostering a hostile work environment.  (Reuters/Lucy Nicholson/File Photo / Reuters Photos)

One of the new plaintiffs, who resides in a different city than the original plaintiff, claims to have been subjected to racial harassment and discrimination from that same manager. Another alleges to have been harassed and denied a promotion on racial grounds by a different manager. All three of the new plaintiffs say they were forced to resign from well-paying positions in the company to escape its racially toxic environment.

EX-AMERICAN EXPRESS EMPLOYEE SPEAKS OUT ON ‘WOKE’ CORPORATE AMERICA: ‘SHAME ON YOU’

“It’s hard to put into words how racially toxic that working environment must have been, from top to bottom, where you can just hear it in these people’s voices. I only hope that more employees come forward to challenge these abhorrent practices because that is how we will finally bring the wrongdoers to justice,” attorney Pivtorak said.

Amex did not provide comment on the amended complaint but denied the claims of the original suit, with a spokesperson telling FOX Business at the time: “The allegations made about our company in the lawsuit are false and without merit. We have a longstanding commitment to living our company values which include fostering a diverse and inclusive culture where all colleagues can thrive.”

“Advancement, hiring, and compensation within our company is based solely on individual qualifications, business, and leadership performance. Any claim to the contrary is wrong, and we do not provide any incentive for behaviors that discriminate against or favor any group of employees,” the spokesperson added.

Manhattan Institute senior fellow Chris Rufo discusses how American Express and other major companies are pushing woke policies onto employees on ‘Fox Business Tonight.’

Amex has faced previous allegations of discrimination. Nick Williams, a White male who served eight years as a manager of business development at Amex until he was suddenly let go in March 2021, turned down a six-figure settlement offer after refusing to sign paperwork forbidding him from speaking out against the credit card behemoth.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS

In 2021, five current and former employees told FOX Business on condition of anonymity that the company engaged in “reverse discrimination” against White employees and steeped the workplace in the tenets of critical race theory. Amex categorically denied the accusations at the time.

Read original article here

Sports

Vanessa Bryant: Jury awards plaintiffs $31M in lawsuit over Kobe Bryant crash photos

Leave a comment

Bryant was awarded $16 million in damages and Chris Chester was awarded $15 million.

Immediately after the verdict was read, Bryant hugged her attorneys. As she continued to cry, Bryant then tearfully embraced her daughter Natalia in the front row. She left the courthouse without making a statement.

“While we disagree with the jury’s findings as to the County’s liability, we believe the monetary award shows that jurors didn’t believe the evidence supported the Plaintiffs’ request of $75 million for emotional distress,” said County attorney Mira Hashmall, who lead outside counsel for L.A. County. “We will be discussing next steps with our client. Meanwhile, we hope the Bryant and Chester families continue to heal from their tragic loss.”

The federal jury found both the Sheriff’s and Fire Departments lacked proper policies and training which caused the violation of rights. The only plaintiff claim not supported by jurors was in a finding that the county fire department was not liable for any long-standing widespread practice or custom of taking illicit photos. The sheriff’s department was found liable for the same issue.

At issue in the trial were photos taken by L.A. County deputies and firefighters that included not just wreckage from the helicopter, but the mangled bodies of those killed including NBA star Kobe Bryant, his daughter Gianna, Chester’s wife Sarah, his daughter Payton and five others.
The National Transportation Safety Board determined the helicopter pilot pushed the limits of bad weather flying rules before he crashed into a hillside in Calabasas, California.

Bryant and Chester argued that the photos of their loved ones caused emotional distress and violated their privacy. Each testified to living in fear the photos may surface, despite L.A. County’s assertion each picture had been destroyed.

Jurors listened to 11 days worth of graphic testimony. Witnesses during the trial included a deputy who said he showed graphic images from the scene while at a bar, another deputy who said he shared photos while playing a video game, a deputy who sent dozens of photos to someone he didn’t know, and a fire official who showed the images to other personnel during an awards ceremony cocktail hour.

In September 2020, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an invasion-of-privacy bill called the “Kobe Bryant Act” that makes it illegal for first responders to share photos of a dead person at a crime scene “for any purpose other than an official law enforcement purpose.” The misdemeanor crime is punishable by up to $1,000 per violation.

Coincidentally, Los Angeles has named Wednesday, August 24, as “Kobe Bryant Day” to honor the Los Angeles Lakers star’s two jersey numbers, 8 and 24, that he wore during his NBA career. The Lakers have retired both numbers.

Defense wanted to separate emotions from legality

Deliberations began Wednesday shortly after an attorney for Los Angeles County argued that the trial is a “pictures case with no pictures,” noting that the gruesome photos of human remains have never actually been seen by the public — or even the plaintiffs.

“No pictures is good. No pictures means no public dissemination … no risk of other people making mistakes,” county attorney Mira Hashmall said in closing arguments of the trial.

In an emotional rebuttal, Bryant’s attorney Luis Li argued Wednesday the actions of the county in taking such photos were reckless and inhumane and caused emotional distress.

“They poured salt into an unhealable wound and that’s why we’re all here today,” he said.

During closing arguments Wednesday, attorneys for Los Angeles County sought to separate Vanessa Bryant’s emotional testimony from the legal issues the jury must consider.

Hashmall argued the county’s actions to delete the photos resulted in them never being distributed publicly, and she argued further that first responders taking photos did not violate Bryant’s rights.

She urged the jury to consider the law, which only allows for a verdict against the county if it can be proven county policies were deficient enough to prevent the spread of the photos or if there is a longstanding custom of such behavior within the sheriff and fire departments.

“If the county didn’t take (the photo sharing) seriously, why is this whole case based on the county’s investigation?” she said.

Jurors also wrestled with what constitutes “the public” in this case. The plaintiffs argued any deputy without an investigatory reason to have the photos should be considered the public. One of the deputies shared photos containing human remains with another deputy as they were playing the video game “Call of Duty,” and another showed them to a bartender he considered a friend.

Hashmall agreed that was wrong, but asked the jury to consider whether it “shocked the conscience,” a legal threshold the jury must consider in rendering its verdict.

“Does it shock the conscience that he needed to talk?” Hashmall asked. She also noted that the deputy was disciplined for his actions. “That’s not a constitutional issue, that’s a county issue,” she said.

In their rebuttal, Bryant’s attorneys argued the photos could still exist because one of the deputies AirDropped them to a firefighter that hasn’t been identified. They also argued the county inadequately investigated the incident, which has allowed for photos of human remains to potentially surface.

The rebuttal evoked tears from Vanessa Bryant and Lakers general manager Rob Pelinka in the courtroom. Li, Bryant’s attorney, said the jury’s decision is “important to families throughout the United States who might suffer a tragedy someday.”

Referring to testimony given by veteran law enforcement officials including Sheriff Alex Villanueva, Li reminded the jury of a practice of first responders keeping “death books” since the Polaroid was around. Li said to the jury: “This has been going on for decades. Make it stop.”

Bryant cried audibly and grabbed tissues when Li stated that photos of family members’ bodies torn apart are private and should not be shared with deputies just “because they’re wearing a badge the next morning, to offer [the photos] to their wife.”

In describing how deputies had to have gone out of their way to find Gianna Bryant’s remains in a ravine to photograph her, Li asked, “Does that shock the conscience?”

Li said while there is no jury form to check a box for better training, better policies, or more discipline, there is only a box jurors can check for damages: “Whatever you put in that box will serve to shine a light on the legacy of Kobe and Gianna Bryant.”

Li concluded with applauding the two whistleblowers, one of whom sat in the courtroom. Li was emotional as he said: “But for those people, we may never have heard of this.”

CNN’s Cheri Mossburg contributed to this report.

Read original article here

Sports

NFL interviewed “at least” 11 of 24 plaintiffs; neither league nor team contacted Harris County D.A.

Leave a comment

Getty Images

As the NFL prepares to do something about the longstanding investigation of Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson, some details have emerged regarding the extent of the review.

Friday’s article from Mark Maske of the Washington Post, which drew most of its attention for the suggestion that the league will start the formal disciplinary process by recommending a one-year suspension for Watson, also explains that the NFL, through Lisa Friel, interviewed “at least” 11 of the 24 plaintiffs represented by attorney Tony Buzbee, “along with other women.” Friel, per Maske, also reviewed “relevant available documents.” Also, and as previously known, Friel interviewed Watson over a total of four days in Houston.

It’s unclear why the other 13 plaintiffs weren’t interviewed. Two emerged only recently. Did the other 11 decline? Or did Friel decide that their accounts weren’t needed?

It’s also unclear who the “other women”? Two who made criminal complaints against Watson have not sued him. Eighteen massage therapists issued statements of support for Watson early in the process. Recently, Jenny Vrentas of the New York Times reported that Watson received private massages from at least 66 women in a 17-month period.

The term “relevant available documents” could be extremely broad, from all text messages and social-media posts generated by Watson’s various massages to the deposition transcripts of everyone who has testified in the case to the civil complaints, the answers to the complaints, and any other paperwork created by the 24 lawsuits. Friel also may have asked attorney Rusty Hardin to give the league the “packet” that was sent to the Harris County prosecutor Johna Stallings for transmission to the grand jury. If it was good enough to get a grand jury to not indict Watson, Friel should be curious to see how the packet characterizes the case — especially if anything Hardin said conflicts with her own impressions based on a diligent review of the evidence.

It’s a lot of material to review. To be thorough, however, every document must be examined. Something that influences the final decision can be lurking anywhere. It’s one of the most basic realities of litigation that includes a vast array of documents. Someone must search the haystacks for the needles, without knowing that any needles are even lurking among the hay.

One thing that didn’t occur was that, as Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg told Mike Meltser in a recent podcast interview, neither the league nor the Browns contacted her. Both league and team would surely say that they didn’t do it because she couldn’t tell them anything about the grand-jury proceedings. But there’s always value in having a conversation. Even if she’s limited in what she can say to them on the record, the establishment of a good relationship with Ogg — starting from the launch of the process — possibly could have yielded some useful off-the-record guidance.

That’s how the world works. How various different forms of sausage get made. If Friel and Ogg (and/or Stallings) had established a relationship that resulted in the development of mutual trust, Friel could have finagled the truth as to why Watson wasn’t indicted. Maybe, as I believe, Ogg and Stallings suspected that Watson did something he shouldn’t have done, they believe it would be impossible to avoid the creation of “reasonable doubt” by Rusty Hardin and his legal team, and they deferred as a practical matter to other aspects of the justice system, whether through the civil lawsuits or, as Ogg told Meltser, the administrative process.

It’s still not known what the league will ultimately do. It’s unclear how thorough the league has been in investigating the situation. However, anything less than completely and totally thorough is not thorough enough, if the league wants anyone to believe that it wanted to make an accurate and clear and legitimate decision as to what Watson did or didn’t do, and as to what the consequences should or shouldn’t be.

The fact that more cases are being filed and more information seems to be surfacing makes it impossible, frankly, to know everything before making a decision. That’s why, in the end, the best decision could be to press pause on Watson’s playing career until the league knows everything that can be known about conduct that has led to 24 lawsuits, two more that will be filed, and possibly even more after that — especially if, for example, the belief that the league didn’t do enough about the situation becomes the catalyst for even more women to sue.

Read original article here

US

With Florida’s congressional map in place, judge says plaintiffs need a new argument fast

Leave a comment

A judge said plaintiffs calling for a court-instated congressional map need to make a new case now that Gov. Ron DeSantis has signed one into law.

“No later than April 29, Plaintiffs and Intervenor Plaintiffs must show cause why the court should not dismiss the case as moot,” wrote U.S. District Judge Allen Winsor.

The order to show cause comes days after attorneys for Secretary of State Laurel Lee called for the case to be dismissed.

Common Cause Florida, Fair Districts Now and five Florida citizens in March filed a complaint in U.S. District Court. In the original complaint, attorneys argued the Legislature and DeSantis would likely not reach an agreement over congressional cartography. At that time, DeSantis had made clear he would veto maps crafted by legislative staff and passed in the House and Senate.

“As a result, there is a significant likelihood that Florida’s political branches will fail to reach consensus to enact a lawful congressional district plan in time to be used in the upcoming 2022 elections,” the original lawsuit read.

But since that time, DeSantis has vetoed the maps. He then called the Legislature back into Session last week, and lawmakers passed a proposal drawn by DeSantis Deputy Chief of Staff Alex Kelly.

The Governor signed legislation drawing up 28 new districts on Friday. That means there is now a map that will produce the correct number of Representatives and all districts have been balanced in population to a single person.

“Now that Florida’s outmoded congressional districts have been superseded by properly apportioned congressional districts, there is no longer any controversy, and this Court cannot provide the Plaintiffs and Plaintiff-Intervenors the relief they seek,” read a brief from Lee’s attorneys.

That relief was a new, court-drawn map.

That said, the federal case also criticized DeSantis for involving himself in the mapmaking process at all.

“The Governor has repeatedly and inappropriately inserted himself into the congressional redistricting process, and with each intervention, the Legislature’s proposed maps have deviated further and further from the required constitutional standards,” the original complaint asserts.

It’s possible plaintiffs this week will argue the map produced by DeSantis’ staff still should be replaced for the 2022 midterms, though many legal experts believe it could take months or years to make an argument that those maps violate state or federal law.

The Florida Supreme Court in 2015 threw out maps approved by the Legislature for violating the state constitution’s Fair Districts amendment. But that took place three years and two election cycles after the lawmaker-approved maps were implemented.

A lawsuit has already been filed in state courts, funded by former Attorney General Eric Holder’s National Redistricting Foundation, that alleges DeSantis’ map runs afoul of the same constitutional provisions.


Post Views:
0

Read original article here

US

Charlottesville Unite the Right civil trial Tuesday: Jury asks if it can separate out damages to plaintiffs in conspiracy claim

Leave a comment

The federal jury asked whether it can separate the punitive amount awarded to individual plaintiffs in claim three. The jury did not mention claims one or two.

Claim three on the verdict form pertains to Virginia civil conspiracy law. The form asks jurors to list the punitive damage amounts, if any, that should be awarded against each defendant, rather than the amounts that should be awarded to specific plaintiffs.

US District Judge Norman Moon answered the jury by saying that they couldn’t separate the punitive amount awarded to individual plaintiffs in claim three, and that only those plaintiffs being awarded compensatory damages could be awarded punitive damages.

The question came on the third day of deliberations, a day after the jury asked the judge about reaching unanimous decisions on the six counts.

This was the fifth question asked by the jury since it began deliberating last Friday.

On Monday, the 12-member panel asked Moon whether they need to be unanimous on each of the final three counts if they cannot reach a unanimous decision on the first three counts.

Two of the counts — five and six — are related just to actions by James Alex Fields Jr., who sped his car into a crowd of protesters, killing one person and injuring dozens. The other involves a statute on racial, religious or ethnic harassment or violence.

Without the jury present, the judge said, “I don’t know why there’s any misunderstanding about that. I think I’m going to tell them they must continue to try to reach a unanimous decision on all six counts.”

The jury will decide in each count whether each defendant is liable for damages. In a civil trial, plaintiffs’ attorneys have to show a defendant is liable by a “preponderance of evidence,” Moon told jurors, meaning 50.1% or greater chance of the claim is true.

Planned removal of statue sparked the rally

The Unite the Right rally was held over on August 11 and 12, 2017, to oppose the planned removal of a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee. As the violence unfolded, it reached a tipping point when Fields — who was protesting the statue’s removal — drove his car into a crowd of counterprotesters, killing 32-year-old Heather Heyer.

Twelve people and five White supremacist and nationalist organizations were listed as defendants in the civil lawsuit.

The plaintiffs, who include town residents and counterprotesters injured in clashes, are seeking compensatory and statutory damages for the physical and emotional injuries they suffered due to the violence at the rally. They also contend rally organizers engaged in a conspiracy and planned the violence to ignite a race and religious war.

Defense attorneys and two high-profile defendants who are representing themselves argued none of the plaintiffs had proven the defendants had organized racial violence.

Closing arguments concluded Thursday. The jurors got 77 pages of final instructions and verdict forms Friday morning and started deliberating.

To succeed on the primary conspiracy claim, the plaintiffs must prove the existence of a conspiracy involving two or more people, according to instructions given to the jurors.

Also, plaintiffs must prove the conspiracy was partially motivated by “animus” toward Black or Jewish people or because the plaintiffs supported those communities and that such conspiracy aimed to deprive them of their right to be free from racially motivated violence, the jury instructions say.

Finally, the plaintiffs must prove at least one person in the conspiracy “took an overt act” in continuing the racial violence and the plaintiffs were injured because of that act, according to the instructions.

The plaintiffs who were hit by Fields’ car are seeking $7 million to $10 million in compensatory damages while others are asking for $3 million to $5 million, according to Roberta Kaplan, one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys say defendants were looking to fight

A large team of powerful lawyers under the umbrella of the nonprofit Integrity First for America are representing the plaintiffs in their civil case.

In closing arguments, attorneys representing the plaintiffs told the jury that the defendants prepared for the “Battle of Charlottesville” and messages sent between them and their actions after the violence were proof of a conspiracy.

The lawyers showed texts, messages on the online platform called Discord, and even Facebook Messenger, to show how organizers not only wanted counterprotesters, who they referred to as antifa or communists, to show up, but they were looking forward to a brawl. Organizers wanted the fight so much, they even tried trolling counter-demonstrators in hopes they would throw the first punch, the attorneys said.

Defense says no proof of conspiracy

Defense attorneys and two high-profile defendants who are representing themselves countered that none of the plaintiffs had proven the defendants had organized racial violence.

“Plaintiffs have to prove an agreement. An agreement isn’t a virus that can be passed around at a rally,” said attorney Bryan Jones, who represents three defendants.

The defendants have spent the entire trial making the argument that not only do they not know each other, but that they were just taking security measures in case they were attacked antifa. Defendants also made the claim that their hate speech is nothing more than off-color jokes that shouldn’t be taken seriously.

CNN’s Mark Morales reported from Charlottesville and Steve Almasy reported and wrote in Atlanta. CNN’s Aya Elamroussi and Amir Vera contributed to this report.

Read original article here

Entertainment

Astroworld Festival: Family of 21-year-old Axel Acosta Avila who died at the concert among 125 plaintiffs who filed a lawsuit

Leave a comment

The lawsuit seeks damages for loss of mental and physical health, and human life, according to the petition filed by the Buzbee Law Firm in Harris County, Texas.

Acosta Avila, a 21-year-old from Tieton, Washington, attended the festival alone, his aunt Cynthia Acosta told CNN affiliate KTRK. “It was his first time going to an event like that,” she told the Houston station.

He was a junior at Western Washington University and had an interest in computer science, according to the university.

The lawsuit filed on behalf of Acosta Avila’s family names, among others, event organizers Live Nation and Travis Scott, who was performing at the time of the deadly crowd surge. The suit also names performer Drake and Apple, Inc., which the lawsuit said streamed the event on its Apple Music platform.

The lawsuit is seeking more than $750 million.

“The damages sought in this case attempts to fix, help, or make up for the harms and losses suffered by these Plaintiffs,” the lawsuit reads. “The quantum sought includes sufficient punitive damages to punish and make an example of all involved in the streaming, promotion, organization and failed execution of the concert, and also to encourage those who engage in such activity in the future to do so with safety at the forefront.”

CNN has reached out to Scott, Drake, Live Nation, Apple and other named defendants for comment on the lawsuit.

In a statement released last week, Scott said he “is distraught by the situation and desperately wishes to share his condolences and provide aid to (the victims) as soon as possible.” Scott has said he will pay for the victims’ funerals.
Live Nation previously said it is “heartbroken for those lost and impacted at Astroworld,” and is “working to provide as much information and assistance as possible to the local authorities as they investigate the situation.”
Drake issued a statement on his Instagram account last week, calling the incident a “devastating tragedy.”

“My heart is broken for the families and friends of those who lost their lives and for anyone who is suffering. I will continue to pray for all of them and will be of service in any way I can,” he added.

At least 140 lawsuits have been filed in the wake of the tragedy, according to Harris County District Court records.

One of those lawsuits was filed by the family of 9-year-old Ezra Blount, who died Sunday after being placed in a medically inducted coma due to injuries sustained at the concert, according to a statement from family attorney Ben Crump.

The lawsuit accuses event organizers of negligence, the statement said.

Music festival takes tragic turn

The Astroworld Festival turned deadly as concertgoers were crushed, trampled and struggled to breathe as the packed crowd surged toward an outdoor stage when Scott, a headliner, started performing on November 5.
Information from fire and police officials at the festival reveal a situation that grew increasingly dangerous before and during Scott’s set. Ambulances transported a handful of injured concertgoers to the hospital that morning and afternoon, according to Houston Fire Department logs.

Shortly before 5 p.m., the Houston Police Department reported “dangerous crowd conditions” at one stage. Eight minutes before Scott took the stage at 9 p.m., more than 260 people had already been treated, according to the logs, which did not specify the type of treatment. And a 9:18 p.m. entry noted a “crush injury.”

Less than half an hour into Scott’s performance, the log states: “This is when it all got real.”

“Multiple people trampled, passed out at front of stage” at 9:33 p.m, police reported. Minutes later, a police operator reported five 911 calls about “unconscious persons in crowd. Report of possible CPR.”

At least one police officer reported the main stage compromised about 9:11 p.m., the Houston Chronicle reported Thursday, citing emergency radio chatter.

The audio included reports of breached barricades, people jumping gates, and breathing and cardiac problems, the newspaper reported. The radio chatter continued until 10:15 p.m., the Chronicle reported. CNN has reached out to the Houston Police Department for comment.

It is unclear what Scott saw from the stage and whether he was aware of the crowd conditions, but he continued to perform until about 10:10 p.m. That was after officials declared the concert a “mass casualty event,” according to Houston Fire Chief Samuel Peña.

Scott did not know of the mass casualty declaration until the following morning, his lawyer has said.



Read original article here