Monroe College grad Trina Thompson is suing for a refund of her $70,000 tuition “because she hasn’t found gainful employment since earning her bachelor’s degree in April, according to a suit filed in Bronx Supreme Court on July 24.” [New York Post; NBC New York]
P.S. Joanne Jacobs: “I have a feeling Monroe doesn’t offer a money-back guarantee.” Jane Genova: lawsuit of this sort “should have been filed years ago”. More: Daniel Indiviglio, The Atlantic; The Onion.
Online courthouse files are a giant privacy/security breach waiting to happen. [Eric Turkewitz]
The sculptor of the artwork on prominent public display in New York’s financial district sues a book publisher and authors who used a photo of it on their cover [John Carney, Business Insider]
Due to a plugin upgrade, many users found our front page stuck on its July 30 version over the past couple of days. I think I’ve resolved it now; if you’ve still got a July 30 version of the front page and forced-refresh won’t help (Windows: ctrl+F5, Mac/Apple: Apple+R or command + R), let me know.
Investigators for the Salem, Mass. police concluded that the Pereira cousins’ vehicle had been speeding along recklessly at 81 mph when they collided with the Honda Odyssey minivan of Christine Speliotis and her passenger; Timothy Pereira now faces multiple charges while police concluded that Speliotis was traveling at a reasonable speed and did not charge her with wrongdoing. Now Brandon Pereira, who was a passenger in his cousin’s vehicle and severely injured in the crash, is suing Speliotis, who with her passenger suffered broken bones and other injuries. His attorney, Roland Hughes, provided this quote to the Salem News: “Basically, under Massachusetts law I’m trying to get compensation for my client anywhere I can.”
Schools across the United Kingdom are enacting rules against traditionally tied boys’ neckties in favor of clip-ons, citing safety concerns. [BBC via Free Range Kids]
Deputy Headmistress has some thoughts.
The vote was 283-142. From the New York Times account, which quotes four named supporters of the bill and no opponents, you’d barely get any sense of why the bill might be considered controversial. But the San Francisco Chronicle, L.A. Times, Des Moines Register and Omaha World Herald have all reported on what the first-named called the “uproar among small farmers”. McClatchy’s summary confusingly suggests that farms “in part” are not covered by the bill (those already regulated by USDA won’t be subject to the FDA), but it does establish clearly why the main impacts of the bill are likely to be felt gradually rather than immediately:
The bill orders federal agencies to prepare certain food safety regulations. But these highly detailed regulations will be years in the making.
Notably, the bill gives the Department of Health and Human Services three years to establish “science-based standards for the safe growing, harvesting, packing, sorting, transporting and holding of raw agricultural commodities.” These standards could cover everything from manure control and employee hygiene to water quality.
Federal officials must also prepare regulations establishing a tracing system to “identify each person who grows, produces, manufacturers, processes, packs, transports, holds or sells” dangerous food.
More: Greg Conko, CEI, Carter Wood, ShopFloor; on the outcry from organic producers, Reuters and Taylor Blanchard/Charlotte Examiner.