2015 was quite a year for Uber, Silicon Valley’s hottest Gig Economy start up, where a ride is just a click away. While Uber Inc. has reached an all time high in sales generated, they also lead another stat: Most frequently sued. In fact, Uber has 50 lawsuits filed in U.S. Federal Courts in 2015 alone, 34 more than Lyft, a similar On Demand car service.Google+
A settlement has been reached in a suit against the popular gaming app “Angry Birds”. Seattle artist Juli Adams brought the maker Hartz Mountain to court. She alleged that she lost out on a large sum amount of money from the game that included the pet toys she says she designed. The suit was initially filed in August of 2014.
In September of 2015 a group of consumers filed two separate class-action lawsuits in
California against food giants Mars Inc. and Nestlé. Federal Lawmakers, State Department officials, and pet food companies are accusing the major seafood-based pet food producers for failing to disclose its dependence on forced labor.
With celebrity endorsements from Kim Kardashian, Miley Cyrus, Demi Lovato, and
more, EOS lip balm has become increasingly popular. Despite the growing brand, some customers have had a less than buzz worthy experience. On January 12, a class action lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles. Consumer, Rachael Cronin, applied EOS lip balm, and was alarmed when her lips quickly became dry and coarse “like sandpaper”. In an attempt to relieve her symptoms, Cronin applied more of the EOS lip balm. To her dismay, however, the symptoms worsened. Her lips cracked around the edges and she had severe blistering, which caused her to seek medical attention on December 7, 2015. Cronin shared an image of her lips on Facebook. According to the lawsuit, the post “set off a frenzy of responses from other individuals who shared the identical experience with EOS”.Google+
In a federal lawsuit filed this week in Akron, Ohio, a group of Athiests is suing the
federal government to withdraw the phrase “ In God We Trust” from all United States currency. The Athiest group is arguing that the phrase is a clear violation of the separation of church and state. There are 41 plaintiffs included in the suit, which is being spearheaded by lawyer Michael Newdow, whom is 0-1 in federal cases after losing the effort to remove “Under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance.Google+