seen from United States
seen from Sweden
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from Oman
seen from United States
seen from Ecuador
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from Canada
seen from Yemen
seen from Hong Kong SAR China
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Netherlands
seen from United States
seen from Italy
seen from China
How often do creditors actually win debt collection lawsuits?
Creditors may regularly prevail in the debt collection lawsuits they file, but they aren’t always the winner in court. Getty Images/iStockphoto Over the past few years, many borrowers have become accustomed to carrying larger credit card and loan balances than they once did. That’s because a mix of higher borrowing costs, persistent inflation and rising everyday expenses have made it harder for…
Judge orders TV station to pay reporter $2.4 million after she says she was fired for complaining about racial discrimination https://unheardvoicesmag.com/2026/08/01/tv-reporter-ojinika-obiekwe-retaliation-and-racial-discrimination-law-suit-2-4-million-pix11-nexstar-media-group/
A new lawsuit accuses her of hiding over $400,000 in property to avoid paying a couple she discriminated against.
Daniel Villarreal at LGBTQ Nation:
A new lawsuit filed this month accuses former county clerk Kim Davis of deliberately transferring over $400,000 of land to family members to avoid paying over $565,000 awarded to a same-sex couple, David Ermold and David Moore, for illegally denying marriage licenses to same-sex couples in 2015, shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark Obergefell v. Hodges ruling legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. The couple sued Davis and won their federal civil rights lawsuit in 2023. Then, in January 2024, a judge ruled that she must also pay $260,000 in legal fees to a couple she denied a license to. Ermold and Moore’s attorneys said that after her mother died in 2025, she inherited three parcels of land worth more than $400,000 and then transferred the property’s deeds to other family members in order to conceal her assets and avoid having to liquidate them to pay the same-sex couple. Attorney Michael J. Gartland said a fraudulent conveyance statute prohibits defendants from transferring property to avoid paying existing claims, WKYT reported. As such, the plaintiffs’ lawsuit has asked a judge to void the property transfers, block further movement of assets, and have estate funds calculated as part of the payment she owes to the couple. Davis, a conservative Christian who has been married four times, initially told the couple that she was acting “under God’s authority” when she refused to issue the license because she believes marriage is only between a man and a woman.
Same-sex couple David Ermold and David Moore sue Kim Davis for hiding big money that was paid to them.
मेटा बिल्कुल गलत समय पर सोशल-मीडिया मुकदमों के पहाड़ से लड़ रहा है
मेटा प्लेटफ़ॉर्म अपने 22 साल के इतिहास के सबसे गंभीर कानूनी खतरों में से एक का सामना कर रहा है – और यह कंपनी के लिए इससे बुरा समय नहीं हो सकता है क्योंकि यह कृत्रिम-बुद्धिमत्ता युग में एक मुश्किल और महंगा संक्रमण का सामना कर रहा है। लॉस्ट स्क्रीन मेमोरियल इंस्टालेशन उन बच्चों का सम्मान करता है जिनकी मौतें सोशल मीडिया से जुड़ी थीं। मार्च में, कंपनी को कैलिफ़ोर्निया और न्यू मैक्सिको में ऐतिहासिक…
Apple faces lawsuit over fake Bitcoin wallet left on App Store after massive losses
Apple is facing a new lawsuit accusing the company of allowing a fraudulent Bitcoin wallet app to remain on its App Store for more than a week after users reported significant losses. According to the complaint, three individuals collectively lost approximately $1.84 million after downloading an app that impersonated the legitimate Sparrow Wallet. The victims entered their Bitcoin seed phrases…
View On WordPress
Poor President Donald Trump. He loves filing lawsuits. Why can’t he just sue the BBC for defamation, demand $10 billion and have them write
Lisa Needham at Daily Kos:
Poor President Donald Trump. He loves filing lawsuits. So fun, so satisfying, so revenge-y! But he often seems to forget that real lawsuits require more than just filing a complaint and demanding a bribe to back down. Why can’t he just sue the BBC for defamation, demand $10 billion and have them write him a check for $10 billion? Who needs all this “discovery” and “proof” anyway? In a very unfun—for Trump, that is—turn of events, the magistrate judge overseeing Trump’s lawsuit just ruled that yes, the BBC can subpoena Trump’s inner circle to talk about Jan. 6, and yes, they can get his financial records.
See, actual lawsuits lead to actual discovery, where the plaintiff actually has to provide things that prove their allegations. To be fair, the cavalcade of U.S. media outlets buckling immediately after Trump sued perhaps gave him the false impression that a lawsuit is simply a demand for a bribe, which is promptly paid. A couple of tiny problems there, just that Trump has to prove, in a defamation lawsuit, that the BBC acted with actual malice, showing that they knew their reporting was false or that they recklessly disregarded the truth.
[...] So, the court ruled that the BBC can subpoena some of Trump’s inner circle to ask about Trump’s state of mind on Jan. 6. Trump’s allegation is that the BBC defamed him by making it look like he was directing the mob to the Capitol and calling for violence, but how very dare they, because his heart is as pure as snow. But of course, if Trump really was intending to get his mob to wreak violence, then it isn’t defamation to say that at all, now is it? So, the BBC gets to chat with Trump officials and minions about his state of mind that day, much to his eternal chagrin. [...]
But neither the BBC nor the court is just supposed to take Trump’s word for that. Proving damages requires coughing up financial data that shows you lost money, missed out on business deals, and the like. Now, Brito is trying to walk back the damages claim, saying he only wants reputational damages and therefore no longer has to show that Trump’s companies were damaged to the tune of $10 billion. This also didn’t fly with the court, which said that Trump has to provide discovery based on the complaint Brito brought, not some future complaint he might bring. Trump can’t rely on his usual thuggery here. The BBC has no broadcast licenses in America that Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr can threaten. The BBC is not seeking government approval to merge with another giant company, approval that could only be achieved with a bribe. The BBC is a giant media company in another country and can afford to defend itself.
Donald Trump once again chickens out of filing a lawsuit, likely because discovery would find about his financial shadiness.
The entity he sued, the BBC, was for a documentary that wasn’t even shown in the USA regarding his Ellipse speech on January 6th, 2021 that served as the major catalyst for the January 6th insurrection.
A group of states, including California, filed a lawsuit to block the merger between Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery.
Lillian Rizzo at CNBC:
A group of 12 state attorneys general filed a lawsuit Monday challenging Paramount Skydance’s proposed acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery. The lawsuit, which came after weeks of speculation on if and when it would be filed, seeks to block the merger for antitrust concerns. CNBC’s David Faber reported earlier in the day that the lawsuit was expected to come on Monday. The merger deal would combine two storied film studios — Paramount and Warner Bros. — as well as streaming platforms Paramount+ and HBO Max. Paramount CEO David Ellison has previously said the streaming services would become one following the transaction. It would also mean the formation of the largest portfolio of TV networks in the U.S., bringing together Paramount’s broadcast network CBS and pay TV channels like MTV and BET with WBD’s CNN, TNT and others. Led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, the lawsuit, which was filed in the U.S. District for the Northern District of California, is also brought forth by attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Washington.
[...] Paramount could face additional costs if closing the deal were to be delayed. As part of the proposed merger, Paramount has has agreed to pay a so-called ticking fee, which kicks in if the closing goes past Sept. 30. Paramount set the fee at an additional 25 cents paid to WBD shareholders per quarter until closing. The fee would equal about $650 million in cash value per quarter for every quarter the deal is not closed.
12 states, led by California, are leading a lawsuit against the Paramount Skydance behemoth’s takeover of WBD.
See Also:
Reuters, via HuffPost: California, 11 States Suing To Block Paramount's $110 Billion Warner Bros. Deal
Daily Kos: Democratic attorneys general sue to stop MAGA media merger
