A family is accusing their property association in Boca Raton of unfairly punishing them because they are members of the development’s growing Orthodox Jewish community.
What began as a two-minute ritual inside a Florida country club has grown into a federal civil rights case — and the latest flashpoint in a growing debate about religious expression in shared spaces.
The Boca Grove Country Club actions “may be the most egregious religious discrimination case I’ve ever handled,” a partner at Dhillon Law Group said.
BOCA RATON – An Orthodox Jewish family in Boca Raton has filed a $50 million federal civil-rights lawsuit, claiming the Boca Grove Property Owners Association unfairly suspended them over a social media video showing a Jewish ritual.
The Supreme Court is reviewing a major case that could impact who gets U.S. citizenship. President Donald Trump’s executive order aims to stop the children of illegal immigrants from automatically becoming U.S. citizens. NTD discusses this with Mark Meuser, counsel with Dhillon Law Group Inc.
The rapid rise of generative artificial intelligence (AI) has sparked concerns about its potential to spread false, reputation-damaging information. Yet few defamation lawsuits have been filed worldwide to establish legal precedent for AI companies’ liability.
A lawsuit for wrongful death against the man convicted of murdering tech mogul Bob Lee has also taken aim at global security firm Securitas, as well as two homeowners' associations
President Trump recently made headlines when he said he would like to see California enact a voter ID requirement. There are three ways that a voter ID requirement could be instituted in California in the near term: a new federal law, a new state law, and a ballot measure. The first is out of our control and the second is never going to happen.
Three weeks before Christmas, in 2016, Greg Robillard received an email from his lawyer. Attached was a brusque, five-page letter from an attorney representing his former employer, a tech startup named Opal Labs based in Portland, Oregon.
On Jan. 20, 2025, both former President Biden and President Trump issued pardons pursuant to Article 2, Section 2 of the United States Constitution.
During the 2024 elections, political advertisers spent tens of billions of dollars trying to will their preferred candidates into office. The groundwork for this historic spending spree, however, was actually laid exactly 15 years ago.
Great news! Your UK based social media dating company – “Better Than Cupid” – just got funded. It’s been launched in the US and is slated to be released in other countries. You just started celebrating. But then you get an e-mail from your general counsel: “We’ve been sued in NY.
A band of blue-state top cops leaped into federal gun regulation litigation in Texas Thursday, asking two courts to fill defense vacuums after President Joe Biden leaves office next week. One of those efforts was instantly rebuffed.
It has been almost five years since federal employees packed up their desk plants and office mugs and retreated to the comfort of their sofas.
A Federal Election Commission opinion in March that was thanks to legal pressure from Democratic attorney Marc Elias ended up giving an assist to the Trump campaign and is poised to reshape the campaign finance system.
President-elect Donald Trump’s resounding victory signals a turning point for our nation. As America grapples with the consequences of unchecked diversity, equity and inclusion or DEI policies,
At first blush, requiring adult visitors of pornographic websites to verify their age might not seem controversial: after all, if it might help prevent some children from accessing inappropriate materials, what’s the problem?
The recent 9th Circuit case of X Corp. v. Bonta tackles the messy issue of what constitutes a “standard business report” in the space of social media content moderation – and whether compelling platforms to disclose their definitions and moderation practices (if any) regarding controversial categories of content violates their First Amendment rights.
Vice President Kamala Harris claimed the mantle of a civil rights champion as part of her presidential campaign origin fable. But her record tells a darker tale. At every step of her career, Harris has proven that the most dangerous place for a constitutional norm to be is standing between Harris and her political ambitions.
A California federal district court has upheld discipline imposed on a 7-year-old by her school district in connection with a picture she drew for a friend that the principal deemed inappropriate.
Does the government violate citizens’ First Amendment rights when it pressures social media platforms to remove posts it doesn’t approve of? It’s a question at the heart of speech doctrine in the modern age but was avoided by the Supreme Court in the recent case of Murthy v. Missouri.
Students accused of misconduct at private high schools around the country are at the mercy of school administrators, who often act as judge, jury and executioner in cases of student discipline.
A Florida state court judge has awarded the operators of a pet store nearly $53,000 in attorney fees defending against a lawsuit over sexual harassment and gender discrimination after a manager allegedly showed a video of his genitalia to an underage female employee while on the job.
A Santa Clara County jury has awarded $1 million and tuition reimbursement to two former students who sued an elite Catholic high school in Mountain View, saying administrators forced them out over an alleged blackface photo that actually showed teens masked in acne medication.
Businesses have been navigating through a continuously altering and evolving employee benefits landscape. Work-from-home and hybrid office trends, new technological advancements and workforce shortages in many industries have led to a new set of expectations, protocols and best practices when it comes to businesses determining the right benefits packages for their employees.
In the evolving landscape of employment law in California, the case of Elinton Gramajo v. Joe’s Pizza on Sunset Inc. et al. emerges as a significant development with wide-ranging implications for both employers and employees.
Last month, Senator Bernie Sanders introduced a bill titled “Thirty-Two Hour Work Week Act” to the U.S. Senate, which would reduce the full-time workweek from 40 hours to 32 hours.
As the modern marketplace of ideas, Big Tech platforms are ground zero for government-coerced suppression of political speech.
This is why fair and free elections will be in danger if the Supreme Court does not immediately put a stop to self-interested government bureaucrats pressuring social media platforms to censor Americans’ speech online.
The long legal battle between Applied Medical Distribution Corporation and its former employee, Stephen Jarrells, highlights the intricacies of trade secrets law, providing valuable lessons for businesses and their attorneys.
The family of a student at Muirlands Middle School in La Jolla has filed a lawsuit against employees of the San Diego Unified School District following his suspension for wearing “offensive” face paint at a football game.
A student was confronted by a teacher at Muirlands Middle School after filing a lawsuit for being wrongly suspended for wearing “blackface.”
When it comes to sexually explicit images generated by AI, Taylor Swift is just the tip of the iceberg.
Ohio legislators have one last chance to protect children from “gender-affirming care.” They must not be fooled by Gov. Mike DeWine’s diluted executive order that bans gender transition surgeries but does nothing to stop the chemical castration of vulnerable children or protect equal opportunities for girls in athletics.
With the nationwide proliferation of defamation lawsuits in recent years, a question that often arises among legal scholars and First Amendment enthusiasts is whether the seminal case of New York Times v. Sullivan should remain good law.
Do social media platforms “speak” when they pick and choose what user speech they disseminate?
Last week, the California Court of Appeal decided a case with important implications for those who file public records requests
Attorney Advertising