In line with our weekly blogs of weird laws from across the country, let’s continue looking at some other weird laws.  Last week we saw some strange Medical laws from all around the US.  Let’s see what other weird laws are out there!

Here are this week’s weird laws.  Enjoy!

New Hampshire: It is illegal for someone to check into a hotel using a fake name.

Random Fact: I’ve heard that Britney Spears sometimes uses the name Alotta Warmheart when she checks in at hotels. Sorry for blowing your cover Britney! 

Texas: It is illegal to sell your eye in Texas.

According to Texas’s Prohibition of the Purchase and Sale of Human Organs act, it is illegal for a person to sell his or her “Kidney, liver, heart, lung, pancreas, eye, bone, skin, fetal tissue.”  So if you want to sell your eye on eBay or Craigslist in Texas, you should probably think twice before doing so.

Utah: It is illegal to sell alcohol during emergencies. That’s weird… isn’t that when alcohol is consumed the most?

New York: It is illegal to have an affair in New York… As it should be!!!

Virginia: It is illegal for unmarried persons to cohabitate.

What was that one catchy Beyonce song?  Oh ya… “If you like it then you shoulda put a ring on it!”

What do you think about these weird laws?  Are there any weird laws that you find unusually strange?

Have any of you tried Taco Bell’s new item, the Doritos Locos Taco?  If you have not, I recommend you do ASAP because if this next story is true, the court might place a lean on Taco Bell to stop the production of Doritos flavored taco shells!

A federal prison inmate named Gary Cole has filed a lawsuit against Taco Bell alleging that he invented the Doritos Locos Taco and that “Taco Bell and Frito-Lay stole the idea from him.”  According to Huffington Post, “In September 2006, Cole wrote up a list of nine product ideas.”  Included on that list was “Taco Shells of All Flavors.”  Cole alleges that he sent that list to two individuals but “the letter was stolen through the United States Postal Service Mail and submitted to Frito Lays [sic], Taco Bell, Pepsi Co, Yum Brands, by someone whose identity remains a mystery to Cole.”

Cole is trying to prove that Taco Bell stole his idea and wants them to stop producing any more Doritos flavored taco shells.

What is Intellectual property?

Intellectual property refers to one of a kind creations and products of the human mind that include ideas, brands, logos, inventions, patents, trademarks and copyrights.

What are your thoughts about this story?

I have never really understood how people can be cruel to their defenseless pets.  Some people have no regard for the life and safety of animals.  The life of 17 helpless puppies could have been cut short had it not been for a woman named Karen Read.

Read was driving on State Park Road in Indiana when she saw a person dump a mother and her puppies along the road.  She was not able to identify the person who dumped the puppies on the road but did notice that the person was in a gold SUV.

Information About Adopting the 17 Dumped Puppies:

The puppies are Lab mixes, and range from 6 to 12 weeks old.  They are safe at the local shelter and are currently awaiting adoption.

I am unsure whether these puppies have all been adopted.  If you are interested in adopting the abandoned puppies, they are currently at Lakeshore PAWS in Valparaiso. 

If they are still available, you must first fill out an adoption survey.

Important reminder to pet owners: If you or a loved one owns a pet that you can no longer afford or care for, do not abandon them.  There are local no-kill shelters and humane societies that will willingly provide a home for your unwanted pets.

In my opinion, the abandoner should face many years in prison for dumping 12 helpless puppies on the road.  What do you think the abandoner’s punishment should be?

In a class action lawsuit, around a million Wells Fargo customers from California accused Wells Fargo of “imposing excessive overdraft fees on checking account customers.”

On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge William Alsup sided with the consumers.  He stated, “the fourth-largest U.S. bank violated a California law that protects consumers against fraudulent misrepresentations” and ordered Wells Fargo to pay $203 million to settle class action litigation.

How Did Wells Fargo Mislead Its Customers?

According to Judge Alsup, Wells Fargo Bank misled consumers regarding their overdraft fee practices by doing the following:

• “Affirmatively misleading the class” as to its practice
• “Engaging in a practice likely to mislead the class to believe that processing would be done in chronological order”
• Subjecting Wells Fargo customers to unexpected charges

This ruling obviously isn’t sitting too well with many Wells Fargo banks.  According to NBC News, “the San Francisco-based bank plans to appeal” the ruling.

What is Fraudulent Misrepresentation?

Fraud occurs when one intentionally deceives another.  It can be filed as either a civil or criminal claim.  Therefore, the fines for fraud can be monetary as well as punitive.

For more information about the lawsuit, you can search the case online.  The name of the case is Gutierrez et al v. Wells Fargo Bank NA, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 07-05923.

Optimus Tower Quartz Portable Heaters

Family Dollar Stores issued a recall of about 19,640 units of Optimus Tower Quartz Portable Heaters.  According to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, these heaters “can overheat posing a fire hazard.”

Product Information:

• Product Name: Optimus Tower Quartz Heaters
• Importer: Family Dollar Services Inc., of Matthews, N.C.
• Units: About 19,640
• Product Dimensions: 10 inches wide, 25 inches tall and 9 inches deep. T
• Places Sold:  Sold exclusively at Family Dollar Stores
• Dates Sold: From September 2012 through December 2012
• Price of Product: About $35


Click to view pictures of the recalled portable heaters.

Injuries To Date:

• To date, there have been 10 reports of the product overheating.  Of these 10 reports, some of them included the temperature knobs melting.
• To date, there have been no reports of injury, fire or property damage.

Full Refund:

If you or a loved one has purchased the portable heaters from any Family Dollar Stores location, you should immediately unplug and stop using the heaters.  Furthermore, you should return the heater to any Family Dollar Store for a full refund.

Additional Information:

For information on the recall, consumers can contact Family Dollar Stores at (800) 547-0359.  Consumers may also contact the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) by calling (800) 638-2772.

What to Do if You or a Loved One Has Been Harmed by a Recalled Product?

If you or a loved one has become injured as a result of one of these recalled heaters, you may be entitled to compensation.  Potential damages may include medical bills, property damage, awards for pain and suffering.  Here at LawInfo.com, we have experienced attorneys specializing in products liability cases.  Most of the attorneys at LawInfo.com offer free initial consultations, so it would be advantageous to speak to a products liability attorney to discuss your potential legal claims.

Individuals with soy or egg allergies should read the following carefully! Whole Foods Market is recalling its Curried Chicken and Vegan Curried Chick’n Salads due to undeclared allergens in the salads! I’m sure many vegans aren’t too pleased with this revelation!

Whole Foods Market’s Curried Chicken and Vegan Curried Chick’n Salads Recalled

On May 9, 2013, Whole Foods Market issued a recall of their bulk curried chicken salad and bulk vegan curried chick’n salad due to undeclared soy and egg allergens.  According to the FDA, “in some stores these items may have been sold with reversed labels.”  The FDA reports, “due to the label mix-up, allergens were undeclared; the vegan chick’n salad contains soy, and the curried chicken salad contains egg.”  People who are allergic to soy or eggs could experience serious or life-threatening reactions if they consume the recalled salads.

Recalled Product Information:

• Product Name: Curried Chicken Salad and Vegan Chick’n Salad
• Recalling Firm: Whole Foods Market
• Dates Sold: 5/7/13 and 5/8/13.
• Places Sold: In the cold salad bars at the following Whole Foods Market’s.
  • Darien, Connecticut
  • Fairfield, Connecticut
  • West Hartford, Connecticut
  • Portland, Maine
  • Framingham, Massachusetts
  • Fresh Pond in Cambridge, Massachusetts
  • Milburn-Union, New Jersey
  • Montclair, New Jersey
  • Rose City-Madison, New Jersey
  • West Orange, New Jersey
  • Jericho, New York
  • Lake Grove, New York
  • Manhasset, New York
  • Columbus Circle in New York City
  • Upper West Side in New York City

Click to view a picture of the recalled salad’s product label.

Illnesses To Date:

There have been no reported illnesses to date.

Refund:

Consumers who have purchased the recalled Whole Foods Salads are urged to return the product to the place of purchase for a full refund.

Additional Information:

Customers with additional questions regarding the recall may contact their local Whole Foods Market or call 617-492-5500.  For quick answers regarding the recall, consumers may also go directly to the FDA recall page.

What to Do if a Recalled Product Has Affected You:

If you or a loved one has become injured as a result of a recalled product, you may be entitled to compensation.  It would be beneficial to speak to an attorney specializing in products liability today.

There are inherent risks associated with playing certain sports including hockey, football, boxing, wrestling and soccer.  For example, a professional hockey player knows that hockey is a violent sport that involves a great deal of physical contact.  As such, holding a professional league financially responsible for these inherent risks is questionable.

Derek Boogard who played professional hockey for both the New York Rangers and the Minnesota Wild was found to have “suffered from chronic traumatic encephalopathy, a brain disease caused by repeated blows to the head.”  According to his family, Boogard was given “prescription pain medications, sleeping pills, and painkiller injections by NHL teams’ physicians, dentists, trainers and staff” to treat pain and injuries.”  Sadly, Boogard passed away in 2011 “from a combination of alcohol and pain medication.”

NHL Player’s Family Blames the NHL for Their Son’s Death

Boogard’s family has placed blame on the NHL.  His family has filed a wrongful death suit against the NHL, alleging the following:

• That the NHL is responsible for the “physical trauma and brain damage that Boogaard sustained” while in the NHL.
• That the NHL is responsible for Boogaard’s “addiction to prescription painkillers.”
• That the NHL team physicians prescribed “an inordinate amount of pain medications” for Derek Boogaard.
• That the NHL “breached its duty to Boogaard by failing to monitor his prescriptions or establish proper procedures for administering and tracking them.”
• That “the substance-abuse program knew that Boogaard violated its rules many times.”  However, according to the lawsuit, the program “never disciplined or suspended him, as program rules dictate.”  The rules that he allegedly violated, included a “series of failed drug tests” and an “admission that he sometimes bought painkillers illegally.”

Statute of Limitations for Wrongful Death Actions:

According to NY Times, the Boogard family lawsuit against the NHL was “filed in time to beat two-year statutes of limitation for wrongful-death cases in places like Illinois and New York.”  Most states have different laws regarding statutes of limitation for wrongful-death cases.  You can determine the length of time available in your state by speaking to a wrongful-death attorney in your area.

Do you think the NHL disregards player injuries?

The case is Bowman v. Monsanto  and the recent ruling by the Supreme Court means that Farmers must pay Monsanto each time they plant one of the conglomerate company’s genetically modified soybeans. Despite the Indiana Farmer’s argument that his farming techniques did not violate Monsanto’s patent on the seeds, the Supreme Court Justices weren’t buying it.

Farmer Vernon Hugh Bowman alleged that Monsanto’s seeds are herbicide-resistant and self-replicating and therefore the seeds’ offspring that he planted were not in violation of the patent as expressed by Monsanto. Unfortunately for Bowman, the Justices did not agree and Justice Kagan, writing for the majority, said that a “seeds-are-special” exception just does not exist in the eyes of the law.

“Bowman devised and executed a novel way to harvest crops from Roundup Ready seeds without paying the usual premium,” said Kagan, She said his “blame-the-bean defense” strategy just wasn’t applicable.

“Bowman was not a passive observer of his soybeans’ multiplication; or put another way, the seeds he purchased (miraculous though they might be in other respects) did not spontaneously create eight successive soybean crops,” Kagan wrote.

Patents and Self-Replication Issues

Though the main thrust of the case discussed soybeans, the underlying subject was regarding patent protection and its importance to other areas of science and technology where self-replication is at issue. If patents were only honored on the first sale, due to self-replication abilities (a legal theory known as patent exhaustion) then there would be a lack of incentives to invest in this science as well as a fear by most companies regarding the threat to their investments; meaning companies truly would have no control or claim to their products once they were sold.

Justice Kagan did however warn that this decision was limited in scope and did not address all self-replicating patent issues that may present themselves. “We recognize that such inventions are becoming ever more prevalent, complex, and diverse,” Kagan wrote. “In another case, the article’s self-replication might occur outside the purchaser’s control. Or it might be a necessary but incidental step in using the item for another purpose.” However she did conclude that “We need not address here whether or how the doctrine of patent exhaustion would apply in such circumstances.”

Farming Practices Are Source of Debate in Patent Law

It seems that the justices accepted this case due to their belief that Bowman’s farming practices are those that would threaten future scientific innovation which is at the center of so many patent law debates. If someone were able to recreate a patented product simply by planting the progeny of a plant, for instance the soybean,  “a patent would plummet in value after the first sale of the first item containing the invention,” said Kagan. “And that would result in less incentive for innovation than Congress wanted.”

Years ago Bowman entered into an agreement with Monsanto to purchase their Roundup Ready (Roundup Resistant) soybeans for his first planting on 300 of his acres in southern Indiana. As part of the agreement, Bowman agreed that he would not save any seeds from his crop for future planning, and technically he didn’t. Bowman says that a second planting of the crop is always more risky and did not feel that paying Monsanto’s prices once more would be a cost-effective business practice. So instead of purchasing from Monsanto, Bowman purchased commodity soybeans from the local grain elevator (which are typically used as livestock feed).

The story goes that Bowman continued in this practice, all the while evading Monsanto’s prices and still yielding a generous crop of soybeans. When Monsanto discovered this they filed suit alleging patent violation for which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed and ordered Bowman to pay almost $85,000 in damages.

Bowman eventually conceded the point that he was not in fact creating a new product and that the exhaustion doctrine bars him from doing so. In the end “it was Bowman, and not the bean, who controlled the reproduction (unto the eighth generation) of Monsanto’s patented invention,” Kagan wrote.

I never thought to ask “where do soybeans come from”, but I suppose now I know…perhaps more than I need to!

How many of you remember Skecher’s Shape-ups?  Those are one of the four “toning shoes” that Skechers USA heavily advertised to make individuals believe they could lose weight and get into shape by simply wearing the shoes.  Joe Montana, Brooke Burke, and Kim Kardashian are among the celebrities who helped advocate the idea that these shoes actually helped consumers lose weight.  Only a few people I know can actually look amazing and stay fit without breaking a sweat at the gym… and it’s not those people who wear Shape ups!

Skechers USA’s Unfounded Claims Regarding their “Toning” Shoes:

It has come to light that Skechers USA’s claims that “its toning shoes would help people lose weight, build muscle and get in shape” were unfounded.  The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) called Skechers out on their bogus claims, and charged Skechers for misleading consumers.

Skechers Settles FTC’s charges against them:

According to news sources, Skechers USA has agreed to pay $40 million in a settlement with the FTC.  This penalty will help “provide refunds to people who bought Skechers toning shoes.”

Line of Skechers Shoes that Are Included in the Skechers Settlement Refund:

• Shape-ups
• Resistance Runner
• Toners
• Tone-ups

Additional Information:

According to the Federal Trade Commission, consumers who bought the shoes are eligible for a refund.

For additional information, consumers may contact FTC’s Skechers Hotline at 866-325-4186.

Click to apply for a Skechers refund.

Have any of you purchased these “toning” shoes?  What was your experience with them?

According to Fox Sports, Former Detroit Lions receiver Titus Young has been arrested three times in seven days.

Titus Young’s Arrests:

• May 5, 2013: Suspicion of driving under the influence
• May 5, 2013: Attempting to steal his own car out of the impound lot.
• May 10, 2013 (Less than seven days after first arrest): Burglary, assault of a police officer and resisting arrest.

The 23-year-old receiver is in custody on $75,000 bail.

Do you know of any other NFL players who have been arrested 3 times in one week?  How are their careers looking?

Hopefully, Young seeks help fast.  It would be unfortunate to see him miss out on a highly coveted career most can only dream of.