Fame. This can be any kind of course, via criminal or legitimate activity. Still, fame is the most essential ingredient and it was also the most important, if not key element, for the rapper Rick Ross. Actually, the guy is not suing himself, but instead being sued by “Freeway” Ricky Ross. The difference? One’s a drug dealer, one’s a rapper.

“Freeway” Ricky Ross is actually among the list of top drug lords to have ever trafficked the finest coke money could buy. In his eyes, his name and reputation were promptly stolen by artist Rick Ross. This could be argued as inspiration, but Freeway doesn’t see this as being so. To him, this is thievery of the highest grade. And certainly to a drug dealer, theft is impossibly wicked!

Freeway actually went as far as trying to make this Federal, as well as bringing down Def Jam, Jay-Z, and Universal Music Group. Why? Because those thieving scumbags quite literally stole his name. Freeway never said if Def Jam had to break a locker combination to grab the goods, but he probably doesn’t need to because damn it, the law must be obeyed!

Ultimately, the artist Rick Ross won, Sir Freeway not earning a single dime. This was a load off of Def Jam and Universal, but Jay-Z didn’t care the slightest. Now, why did it fail? In the judge’s own words, a life of crime cannot establish a “secondary meaning”. If this is true, then how is Franc Lucas making his cash? Not on 110th St, obviously.

Source: Rising Stars

This did not going without consequence, however. While attending the rally, Cohen and his crew apparently assaulted a protester simply for “laughs” and filmic value. It didn’t go over very well and now, a man named Mark Skiff, is suing Cohen over punitive damages and medical expenses.

According to the gay cameraman, Skiff asserts that Cohen deliberately held negative banners and posters to incite anger and mob-mentality in the gathering. When asked why, Skiff replied that it was “to enhance the drama” of what the team could’ve captured on film. In his closing statement, Mark added that he has, “the right to go about his business free from violence and intimidation directed at his sexual orientation.”

Source: Justice News Flash

In Blythe, you’re not allowed to wear Cowboy boots unless you happen to already posses at least two cows. This dumb California law is good for weeding out imposter’s. In Baldwin Park, no one is permitted to ride their bike in swimming pools. You can see Johnny Noxville having issues with this, especially when his film’s reviews go down the drain because the director isn’t allowed to tape him and his buddies using a 12-gear mountain bike in an Olympic swimming pool.

Source: SanDiegoNewsNetwork

Listing off a few in no order: you come home to find that food stamps have replaced the usual spot where your dinner plate is. Or, perhaps, your wife makes holiday plans… that don’t include you. Lastly, but most importantly, you notice your wife’s photo framed in your house and your friend’s. Alright, it’s all fun and chuckles, but now on to some factual results. Recommendation for a lawyer is good practice once you view these statistics.

The current divorce rate in America is roughly 50%. That means between you and your friend, one of you is very likely to separate. Scratch that: one of you will separate. But, for whatever reason, don’t look to a higher power to resolve your issues. In fact, that’s the worst possible thing you could do. According to a recent survey, divorce rates among Christians were significantly higher than other faith groups. You could say “hail Mary”, but in the end, you’ll only being hailing your Mary for a limited amount of time (or Susy, Jane, whatever your better half’s name is).

Divorce rates are also high for affluent couples. Take, for example, the prominent Rollins family. They created Rollins Inc., one of the nation’s largest pest control companies. The family is now in turmoil after Mrs Ruth Rollins lawyer-ed up and divorced her husband of 45 years Mr Gary Rollins. Two days prior to the divorce filing, Mr Rollins’ own children filed suit against him over the family trusts. If these two decided to cut ties after 45 years of bliss, what are the odds for the rest of us?

Source(s): Religious Tolerance, ScribD, Atlanta Family Law News

Back in 2007, ESPN Sports reports NASCAR settled a lawsuit for 25 million. Why? A woman named Mauricia Grant was not only sexually harassed but subjected to racial slurs and lewd behavior as a technical inspector in NASCAR’s ring. The insults went from “Nappy Head Mo” to “Queen Sheba” by her wonderful co-workers. Apparently, there was even a designated “color people” time.

Initially, NASCAR inspected the issue and promptly fired two employees. The fun doesn’t end there, though. Accusations continued to fly,  NASCAR’s own Brian Grant defended his business, ensuring this was never to happen. Grant denied these claims, asserting that she’d climbed the chain of command with no results.

Now, while this is just a plain lawsuit with a few dashes of fame thrown on top, it takes a bizarre twist at the end. Grant, while winning a settlement for a large sum of cash (to pay off all those tears of course) received a phone call. She was contacted by human resources at NASCAR, then fired not long after. The kicker? NASCAR is not disclosing why Grant was fired at all.

Picture this:

On the way there, you can’t help but think that this whole thing could be a very bad idea, but hey, it’s not like you’re doing it for football or some loser team like the Chiefs. Ahead, you see a tattoo shop, lights gleaming bright with anticipation for the next costumer – you. Hesitantly, but joyous, you arrive inside and drunkenly oblige the artist to put an everlasting ink splotch on your thigh.

There’s one problem after he’s done: it’s backwards. An inept tattoo artist just slapped on the White Sox logo backwards and this is the worst possible thing in the world (quite possibly the universe) to happen to you. Eugenia Bebis, a fan of the Chicago team, is suing The Mystic for damages up to $50,000. Even with possibility of a reward, she’ll still be undergoing a fancy treatment. To quote the victim’s attorney, “The way she explained it, they are burning the tattoo off with a laser beam.”

Source: Chicago Breaking News Center

Source: itThing

It started in 2004, with the woman attempting to scheme people, in and out of state, by claiming she was involved in battery cases, but not quite having the money for attorney fees. An accomplice, or “co-schemer”, would even go as far as sending letters that the woman had been involved in a violent assault at work. Of course it was then explained that the employer was to be sued and members of the non-existent “family” would sue as well.

It gets better. For the next four years, other victims assisted in sending the woman money for the fake lawsuit. It was even written within the plea agreement to do so, something as devious as the criminal themselves. This person went as far as pretending to be lawyers, attorneys and family members – communicating via e-mail and instant messages – to the victims. After she was apprehended, a grand estimate of over 400,000 dollars is to be paid to the victims.

Source: Birmingham News

According to Above The Law, plaintiff Jonathan Riches has been increasingly irritated by Micheal Vick (yes, the football player). In fact, Mr. Riches, while in prison, was able to determine that Micheal Vick has “pledged allegiance to the Al-Qaeda”, “is in the steroid business”, “subjected him to microwave testing” and even “uses drugs in school zones”. Of course all of this hadn’t take place before the stay at prison, but according to Riches, these things had identity theft (of Riches), illegal dog fighting, extortion, racketeering and tax fraud.

So, as the plaintiff, what does Mr. Riches want? A “63,000,000,000 billion dollars” return for ‘damages’, backed by gold and silver… As wildly entertaining as this is, I have to question what he means with that asking price. And the audacity to ask for it backed by gold and silver? Oh, he’d also like a restraining order, too (because you never know when a player of the Falcons is going to harass you in your own cell). Hilarious enough, this complaint to file suit was actually sent to The District of Columbia.

There was much protest and deliberation over the law. Some even found it unconstitutional. One of the parties that found the new legislation all but constitutional had been the Federal Government. Instead of debating with Arizona, the Federal Justice Department sued.

And who did they sue? Arizona. Apparently, the lawsuit was anticipated since mid-June and comes from beneath the Obama administration. The main complaint of the administration was that Arizona’s law denies the Federal Government control and supremacy over immigration control… But, wasn’t there a place in the constitution that allowed states to defend their borders?

Arizona’s new law was supposed to take effect sometime around July 29th, but this suit prevents it from doing so. The news is somewhat old, but because we happen to be only a week after the initial induction date of the ill-fated law, an update was required. We’ll have to wait and see, however. No word has been mentioned since the new “state-vs-the-union” event.

Source: New York Times