The People's Lawyer Consumer News Alert | |||
![]() |
|||
|
|||
Subscribe to the Newsletter Helpful Links Texas Consumer Complaint Center Credit Reports and Identity Theft Your Guide to Small Claims Court Contact Us 1-713-743-2168 |
The People’s Lawyer’s Tip of the DayHave you gotten an alarming text message about your unemployment insurance benefits from what seems to be your state workforce agency? You’re not alone. Identity thieves are targeting millions of people nationwide with scam phishing texts aimed at stealing personal information, unemployment benefits, or both. Click here for more. Job openings surged to 10.1 million in JuneThe Labor Department said Monday that the number of job openings in the U.S. exceeded 10 million in June. The figure topped economists’ expectations of 9.1 million openings and broke a previous record. Your MoneyBrokerage accounts can be taxed depending on the type of account. There are three main types of brokerage accounts: traditional retirement accounts, Roth retirement accounts and taxable nonretirement brokerage accounts. Each type of account receives a different tax treatment. Retirement accounts are tax deferred, meaning you pay no taxes on any earnings within the account. Instead, you may owe taxes when you withdraw the money from the account. Nonretirement brokerage accounts – also called taxable brokerage accounts – don't have the same tax-deferred advantage. Click here for more. For the LawyersThe Second Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision to deny a motion by Donald Trump, the Trump Corporation, and other Trump family members to compel arbitration of claims related to the multi-level marketing scheme CAN. Defendants argued that, because the plaintiffs had agreed to arbitrate any claims they might have against ACN, the same arbitration clause should force arbitration of any claims against the Trump defendants related to their endorsement of ACN. The Second Circuit agreed that equitable estoppel did not apply, noting: In order to establish equitable estoppel in the present context so as to bind a signatory of a contract (here, the plaintiffs) to arbitrate with one or more nonsignatories (here, the defendants), there must be a close relationship among the signatories and non-signatories such that it can reasonably be inferred that the signatories had knowledge of, and consented to, the extension of their agreement to arbitrate to the non-signatories. Here, there neither is nor was such a relationship. There was no corporate relationship between the defendants and ACN of which the plaintiffs had knowledge, the defendants do not own or control ACN, and the defendants are not named in the IBO agreements between ACN and the plaintiffs. Doe v. TrumpCorp, 2d Cir 2021 Click here for more. |
||
To stop receiving email news alerts from the Center for Consumer Law, please click here. |