A mother in Pennsylvania is suing TikTok and its parent company ByteDance after her 10-year-old daughter died.

Tawainna Anderson says her daughter Nylah died after taking part in the so-called “Blackout Challenge,” in which users are encouraged to hold their breath until they pass out.

Anderson said in December of 2021, Nylah ended up in the intensive care unit and was hospitalized for several days before she passed away.

The lawsuit states that Nylah attempted the challenge after her “for you page” on the app showed her a video of it.

The “for you page” brings users videos based on an algorithm, which is based on their viewing and engagement habits.

The lawsuit goes on to say that the TikTok algorithm “determined” that the Blackout Challenge would be of interest to the 10-year-old girl.

Anderson goes on to accuse TikTok of preying “upon vulnerable users, such as children.”

The mom is now suing TikTok and ByteDance for wrongful death and negligence for an undisclosed amount in damages.

TikTok told NBC News that the challenge has been around before the app started and “has never been a TikTok trend.”

An appeals court has tossed out former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore's $95 million defamation lawsuit he filed against comedian Sacha Baron Cohen.

The Associated Press reported that the three judges on the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan upheld a lower court's ruling in favor of Baron Cohen on Thursday.

The former Senate candidate sued Cohen for a joke the comedian made at Moore's expense in a segment on the Showtime program "Who is America?" in 2018.

The judges said the politician had signed a waiver before his appearance that he would bar him from filing a claim of defamation against the comedian, CNN reported.

In the segment, Cohen presented a so-called pedophile detector during his interview with Moore, which beeped when it got near the Alabama politician.

The judges said that the segment was “clearly comedy” and that viewers would see it as such, the news outlet reported.

CINCINNATI —

A man has filed a lawsuit against a Cincinnati police officer accusing the officer of tasing him while he was handcuffed in the back of a cruiser.

The encounter happened in April of 2020 and was caught on body camera video.

The man's attorney filed a $1 million lawsuit in federal court citing the officer used excessive for and his client was traumatized and has PTSD.

The man, identified as Samson Jackson, was being transported on a warrant for charges of felonious assault and robbery.

In the body camera footage you can hear Jackson antagonizing Officer David Dozier, calling him names and challenging him to a physical fight.

Officer Dozier reports on his radio that while in the backseat, Jackson pulled his handcuffs to the front of his body, became free from the lap bar and spit on him.

That's when Dozier pulled over his cruiser and stopped.

Jackson's attorney said officer Dozier then tased his client multiple times.

Video shows Jackson was handcuffed during the entire encounter.

In the lawsuit, Jackson claims his rights were violated and that he was subjected to excessive force.

FOP President Dan Hils released a statement Thursday about the incident.

Hils said officer Dozier was suspended for three days following the incident.

You can read the full statement below:

This criminal repeatedly called our African American officer the N word, threatened to assault him, and said he would urinate on the grave of the officer's mother and on the face of the officer's daughter. Our officer had just lost his brother to a murder the month before this incident. Police officers are people too, and statements like those made by this criminal are vicious.

The suspect managed to get his hands out from behind his back and was trying to slip out of the handcuffs. The suspect spit on our police officer. Spitting on an officer is a crime. The officer was understandably angry, but the officer realizes the repeated tasing of the suspect was improper. This happened two years ago, the officer accepted his punishment of three days suspension and has been back on the job serving the community ever since.

The officer accepted responsibility for what he did wrong. However, it's also wrong for a suspect who acted in such a racist and violent manner to ask city taxpayers to give him money two years after the fact.

A federal judge in Florida has dismissed former President Donald Trump's lawsuit against former first lady Hillary Clinton and former top FBI officials, calling it a "200-page political manifesto."

According to his lawsuit, Trump claimed the former Democratic presidential nominee, former FBI Director James Comey, and others conspired against him by claiming that he coordinated with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election, USA Today reported.

On Thursday, District Judge Donald Middlebrooks dismissed the case, saying that the lawsuit contained “glaring structural deficiencies” and that many of the “characterizations of events are implausible," the Associated Press reported.

In his lawsuit, Trump claimed that Clinton and the Democratic National Committee "worked together with a single self-serving purpose: to vilify Donald J. Trump," USA Today reported.

In his ruling, Middlebrooks wrote that none of Trump's claims supported that there was a conspiracy against him, the Associated Press reported.

In 2019, special counsel Robert Mueller's concluded after a special investigation that investigators "did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities," the Associated Press reported.

According to the news outlet, Trump's lawyer, Alina Habba, said the former President would appeal the dismissal.

The largest tobacco manufacturers will have to post eye-catching warning signs about cigarette smoking in over 200,000 stores across America beginning Saturday, one of the final major steps in a lawsuit the Justice Department filed against Big Tobacco in 1999.

The signs will be installed in stores between July 1 and Sept. 30, and must be displayed until June 30, 2025. The signs must be in English and also Spanish in regions where there is a significant population of Spanish speakers.

The 17 distinctive statements were “specified by the court many years ago,” according to a press release from a consortium of anti-smoking groups. It applies to Altria and its Phillip Morris U.S. subsidiary, RJ Reynolds and ITG Brands.

An example of a corrective sign shows a large asterisk icon with the statement, “Smoking kills, on average, 1,200 Americans. Every day.” The signs will be either 144 or 348 square inches and will be posted in “highly visible places.”

It’s the final step after years of dispute following US District Court Judge Gladys Kessler’s judgment in 2006, when the tobacco companies were first ordered to make the corrective statements. The landmark judgment found the industry defendants guilty of lying about the dangers of cigarettes and secondhand smoke.

“The tobacco companies fought these point-of-sale corrective statements in court for 16 years,” said a statement from the public health advocates, but an agreement was reached last year to post the signs.

The content of the corrective statements was finalized in 2017 and then began to run in different media forms.

The defendants lied “about the devastating health effects of smoking and environmental tobacco smoke, they suppressed research, they destroyed documents, they manipulated the use of nicotine so as to increase and perpetuate addiction, they distorted the truth about low tar and light cigarettes so as to discourage smokers from quitting, and they abused the legal system in order to achieve their goal – to make money with little, if any, regard for individual illness and suffering, soaring health costs, or the integrity of the legal system,” Kessler said in her final opinion.

In a statement, Altria said it is transitioning adult smokers to “potentially less harmful products.”

“This is one of the final steps to close a long-running lawsuit with the U.S. Department of Justice,” a company spokesperson said.

R.J. Reynolds said these corrective statement signs appear on its website and had previously appeared in newspapers, television, radio and on pack inserts.

The top of the company’s website links to a variety of court-ordered statements, from the health effects and addictiveness of smoking to cigarette design to enhance delivery of nicotine.

“The tobacco industry has evolved considerably since this lawsuit was filed nearly 25 years ago, back in 1999,” a spokesperson said. “Today, Reynolds American Inc. and its operating companies have a clear purpose to build ‘A Better Tomorrow’ by reducing the health impact of our business,” saying it sells “potentially-reduced risk” nicotine and tobacco products. But vaping has been linked with an increased risk of respiratory diseases.

MISSOULA, Mont. —

A federal jury ruled Wednesday that a health clinic in a Montana town where hundreds of people have died from asbestos exposure submitted 337 false asbestos claims that made patients eligible for Medicare and other benefits they shouldn't have received.

The seven-person jury said that the fraudulent claims caused more than $1 million in damage to the government.

The case focused on the Center for Asbestos Related Disease in Libby, Montana. BNSF Railway filed a lawsuit against the clinic under the federal False Claims Act in 2019.

The railroad company owned by billionaire Warren Buffett is also a defendant in numerous lawsuits over its own role in the town's contamination. In 2020, Montana's Supreme Court found BNSF liable for shipping asbestos-tainted vermiculite from a nearby mine through Libby.

The clinic and its high-profile doctor, Brad Black, have been at the forefront of efforts to help residents of the town, which came to national prominence when it was declared a deadly Superfund site two decades ago.

The jury's finding leaves the clinic subject to additional penalties. Under the False Claims Act, the railway could be eligible for 15% to 25% of any amount recovered by the government.

CARD and its attorneys had denied it made false medical claims on behalf of patients, arguing its diagnoses were in line with requirements of the 2010 Affordable Care Act, which included special provisions for the Libby victims.

"CARD was doing exactly what the law said," clinic attorney Tim Bechtold said earlier Wednesday during closing arguments that followed 11 days of testimony.

BNSF's lawsuit alleged CARD submitted more than 300 false claims on behalf of patients without getting outside confirmation that they had asbestos-related disease. The company also said 1,369 people received federal benefits with no disease diagnosis.

Dr. Black and the CARD clinic have certified more than 3,400 people with asbestos-related diseases, according to court documents.

Asbestos-related diseases can range from a thickening of a person's lung cavity, hampering breathing, to deadly cancer. Under the 2009 federal health law, victims of asbestos exposure in the Libby area are eligible for taxpayer-funded services including Medicare, housekeeping, travel to medical appointments and disability benefits for those who can't work.

Dr. Black is a pediatrician by specialty and has served as the Lincoln County Health Officer. He has previously said the ailments caused by the type of asbestos found in Libby are difficult to detect and can be missed by outside radiologists.

BNSF attorney Adam Duerk criticized Black's stated ability to perceive early signs of asbestosis disease that others missed.

"That's not the practice of medicine, that's the practice of roulette," Duerk said. "When you see it, when you're certain it's there, that's when you diagnose, not before."

Former Democratic U.S. Sen. Max Baucus, of Montana, helped craft the Libby provision in the health law. He said in depositions with attorneys that the clinic's practice of declaring some patients eligible for benefits without confirmation of their condition from a secondary source such as an X-ray was legitimate.

However, U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen barred Baucus's statements from the trial, saying it was the court's role to decide whether the law was followed.

At least 400 people have been killed by asbestos-related disease in the Libby area, according to health officials. Because of the long latency period for those diseases, symptoms can take decades to develop.

The tainted vermiculite came from a mine owned by the Maryland-based chemical company W.R. Grace. It polluted the Libby area over decades, including at a BNSF railway yard in the heart of the town of about 3,000 people.

Cleanup work began in 2000 after media reports of widespread health problems spurred a federal investigation. The EPA years later declared the agency's first public health emergency in the town. More than $600 million was spent to remove vermiculite from thousands of properties in Libby and surrounding communities.

Scientists say exposure to even a minuscule amount of asbestos can cause lung problems.

The case was sealed under court order for two years until the U.S. attorney's office of Montana declined to intervene. Officials have not given a reason.

Asbestos-tainted vermiculite was used as construction material in Libby and it remains inside many houses, where it was used as insulation. It was also shipped across the country by BNSF and installed in millions of homes.

Lawsuits against companies and officials over the contamination in Libby have resulted in large settlements and awards for victims.

More than 2,000 Montana residents reached settlements with the state totaling $68 million for failing to warn them about the dangers of asbestos exposure. In February 2022, a jury awarded an Oregon man $36.5 million in a lawsuit against W.R. Grace's insurer.

TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. —

Chemical manufacturer 3M Co. will pay at least $10.3 billion to settle lawsuits over contamination of many U.S. public drinking water systems with potentially harmful compounds used in firefighting foam and a host of consumer products, the company said Thursday.

The deal would compensate water providers for pollution with per- and polyfluorinated substances, known collectively as PFAS — a broad class of chemicals used in nonstick, water- and grease-resistant products such as clothing and cookware.

Described as "forever chemicals" because they don't degrade naturally in the environment, PFAS have been linked to a variety of health problems, including liver and immune-system damage and some cancers.

The compounds have been detected at varying levels in drinking water around the nation. The Environmental Protection Agency in March proposed strict limits on two common types, PFOA and PFOS, and said it wanted to regulate four others. Water providers would be responsible for monitoring their systems for the chemicals.

The agreement would settle a case that was scheduled for trial earlier this month involving a claim by Stuart, Florida, one of about 300 communities that have filed similar suits against companies that produced firefighting foam or the PFAS it contained.

3M chairman Mike Roman said the deal was "an important step forward" that builds on the company's decision in 2020 to phase out PFOA and PFOS and its investments in "state-of-the-art water filtration technology in our chemical manufacturing operations." The company, based in St. Paul, Minnesota, will halt all PFAS production by the end of 2025, he said.

The settlement will be paid over 13 years and could reach as high as $12.5 billion, depending on how many public water systems detect PFAS during testing that EPA has required in the next three years, said Dallas-based attorney Scott Summy, one of the lead attorneys for those suing 3M and other manufacturers.

The payment will help cover costs of filtering PFAS from systems where it's been detected and testing others, he said.

"The result is that millions of Americans will have healthier lives without PFAS in their drinking water," Summy said.

Earlier this month, three other companies — DuPont de Nemours Inc. and spinoffs Chemours Co. and Corteva Inc. — reached a $1.18 billion deal to resolve PFAS complaints by about 300 drinking water providers. A number of states, airports, firefighter training facilities and private well owners also have sued.

The cases are pending in U.S. District Court in Charleston, South Carolina, where Judge Richard Gergel is overseeing thousands of complaints alleging PFAS damages. A trial of a complaint by the city of Stuart, Florida, had been scheduled to begin this month but was delayed to allow time for additional settlement negotiations.

Most of the lawsuits have stemmed from firefighter training exercises at airports, military bases and other sites around the U.S. that repeatedly used foams laced with high concentrations of PFAS, Summy said.

The 3M settlement is subject to court approval, he said.

3M's website says the company helped the U.S. Navy develop foams containing PFAS chemicals in the 1960s.

"This was an important and life-saving tool that helped combat dangerous fires, like those caused by jet fuel," the company said.

3M said its participation in the settlement "is not an admission of liability" and said if it was rejected in court, "3M is prepared to continue to defend itself."

The cost of cleansing PFAS from U.S. water systems eventually could go much higher than the sums agreed to in the settlements, Summy acknowledged.

"I'm not sure anyone knows what that ultimate number will be," he said. "But I do think this is going to make a huge dent in that cost ... and you don't have to litigate for the next decade or longer."

SEATTLE —

The company whose submersible vanished in the North Atlantic on a tourist dive to the wreck of the Titanic was repeatedly warned that there might be catastrophic safety problems posed by the way it was developed, documents show.

Related video above: Underwater noises detected in search for missing submersible

With five people aboard a vessel that if still functioning would have a dwindling amount of oxygen, an expanding international fleet of ships and airplanes is searching for the Titan, operated by OceanGate Expeditions. The undersea exploration company based in Everett, Washington, has been making yearly voyages to the Titanic since 2021.

In the first piece of good news since the search began, a Canadian aircraft detected underwater noises, though the vessel has not been found, the U.S. Coast Guard reported early Wednesday.

David Lochridge, OceanGate's director of marine operations, wrote an engineering report in 2018 that said the craft under development needed more testing and that passengers might be endangered when it reached "extreme depths," according to a lawsuit filed that year in U.S. District Court in Seattle.

OceanGate sued Lochridge that year, accusing him of breaching a non-disclosure agreement, and he filed a counterclaim alleging that he was wrongfully fired for raising questions about testing and safety. The case settled on undisclosed terms several months after it was filed.

Lochridge's concerns primarily focused on the company's decision to rely on sensitive acoustic monitoring — cracking or popping sounds made by the hull under pressure — to detect flaws, rather than a scan of the hull. Lochridge said the company told him no equipment existed that could perform such a test on the 5-inch-thick carbon-fiber hull.

"This was problematic because this type of acoustic analysis would only show when a component is about to fail — often milliseconds before an implosion — and would not detect any existing flaws prior to putting pressure onto the hull," Lochridge's counterclaim said.

Further, the craft was designed to reach depths of 13,123 feet, where the Titanic rested. But, according to Lochridge, the passenger viewport was only certified for depths of up to 4,265 feet, and OceanGate would not pay for the manufacturer to build a viewport certified for 4,000 meters.

OceanGate's choices would "subject passengers to potential extreme danger in an experimental submersible," the counterclaim said.

However, the company said in its complaint that Lochridge "is not an engineer and was not hired or asked to perform engineering services on the Titan." He was fired after refusing to accept assurances from OceanGate's lead engineer that the acoustic monitoring and testing protocol was, in fact, better suited to detect any flaws than a scan would be, the complaint said.

OceanGate Chief Executive Stockton Rush defended the approach in a speech to a conference in Seattle last year hosted by the tech news site GeekWire. He described how he had taken a prototype down to 4,000 meters: "It made a lot of noise," he said.

So he brought the vessel back up, and on a second dive, it made the same troubling noises, even though it should have been dramatically quieter. The company scrapped that hull, which had been constructed by a marine manufacturer, and built another one with an aerospace supplier, Rush said.

In an emailed statement, a spokesman for the company said the missing sub was completed in 2020-21, so it would not be the same as the vessel referenced in the lawsuit.

OceanGate also received another warning in 2018, this one from the Marine Technology Society, which describes itself as a professional group of ocean engineers, technologists, policy-makers and educators.

In a letter to Rush, the society said it was critical that the company submit its prototype to tests overseen by an expert third party before launching in order to safeguard passengers.

Rush had refused to do so.

Rush was piloting the vessel that is now missing.

The letter, reported by the New York Times, said society members were worried that "the current experimental approach adopted by Oceangate could result in negative outcomes (from minor to catastrophic) that would have serious consequences for everyone in the industry."

In a 2019 interview with Smithsonian magazine, Rush complained that the industry's approach was stifling innovation.

"There hasn't been an injury in the commercial sub industry in over 35 years," he said. "It's obscenely safe because they have all these regulations. But it also hasn't innovated or grown — because they have all these regulations."

SALT LAKE CITY —

The city of St. George must issue a permit for a Utah-based group that organizes drag performances to host an all-ages drag show in a public park, a federal judge ruled, calling the city's attempt to stop the show unconstitutional discrimination.

Related video above: Federal judge rules Tennessee’s anti-drag show law is ‘unconstitutional’

"Public spaces are public spaces. Public spaces are not private spaces. Public spaces are not majority spaces," U.S. District Judge David Nuffer wrote in a Friday ruling granting the preliminary injunction requested by the group. "The First Amendment of the United States Constitution ensures that all citizens, popular or not, majority or minority, conventional or unconventional, have access to public spaces for public expression."

Southern Utah Drag Stars and its CEO, Mitski Avalōx, sued the city of St. George in May after the city denied the group permits for an all-ages show it aimed to host in a public park in April. A complaint filed in federal court accused city officials of "flagrant and ongoing violations of their free speech, due process, and equal protection rights," and asked for St. George to reverse its decision and authorize a drag show at the end of June.

A city events coordinator told Drag Stars, Avalōx said, that the group could start advertising for the April show before obtaining a permit. The city council later denied the permit, citing a never-previously-enforced ordinance that forbids advertising before permit approval.

The permit denial based on that ordinance, Nuffer wrote in his ruling, was a pretext for discrimination.

"Public officials take an oath to 'support, obey, and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Utah,'" Nuffer wrote. "They do not merely serve the citizens who elect them, the majority of citizens in the community, or a vocal minority in the community."

The city now may not enforce any new advertising prohibitions against the group or its show, Nuffer ruled, ordering that the performance must "take scheduling precedence over any other event."

In a statement, the city of St. George said it is committed to ensuring public parks and facilities remain viable and open to residents and those who want to hold special events.

"Our intent is always to follow the law both when we enact laws and when we enforce laws, and we will continue to do so," the statement said. "We have read Judge Nuffer's opinion and while we are disappointed in the result, we are currently evaluating our options in light of the ruling."

The lawsuit marked the most recent development in a fight over drag shows in St. George, Utah, a conservative city 111 miles (179 kilometers) northeast of Las Vegas, Nevada. Since HBO filmed a drag show in a public park last year for an episode of its series "We're Here," the city has emerged as a flashpoint in the nationwide battle over drag performances as they've garnered newfound political scrutiny in Republican-controlled cities and states.

Public events like drag queen story hours and the all-ages event that Avalōx intended to put together have been increasingly targeted in legislatures throughout the country. In May, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a ban on minors attending drag shows, and Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte signed a ban on people dressed in drag from reading books to children at public schools and libraries.

In Utah, a proposal from a St. George Republican to require warning notices for events like drag shows or pride parades in public places stalled after advancing through the state House of Representatives in March. The proposal stemmed from the pushback that resulted from the HBO-produced drag show in St. George.

City officials issued permits for the show over the objection from some council members and community activists. City Manager Adam Lenhard resigned months later after writing councilmembers to say that he could not legally deny the show permits, according to emails obtained by The Salt Lake Tribune.

Avalōx founded Southern Utah Drag Stars after the fallout, hoping to showcase drag for members of the LGBTQ+ community in a rural place where such forms of entertainment are often lacking.

"I made it my mission to continue to do these events and not just one month out of the year, but to do so people that were like me when I was little ... can see that there are queer adults that get to live a long and fulfilled life," Avalōx said in an interview with The Associated Press. "My biggest ambition was to provide a public space where people can go to a park and enjoy a show that's meant for everyone."

Jurors in federal court have awarded $25.6 million to a former Starbucks regional manager who alleged that she and other white employees were unfairly punished after the high-profile arrests of two Black men at a Philadelphia location in 2018.

Shannon Phillips won $600,000 in compensatory damages and $25 million in punitive damages on Monday after a jury in New Jersey found that race was a determinative factor in Phillips' firing, in violation of federal and state anti-discrimination.

In April 2018, a Philadelphia store manager called police on two Black men who were sitting in the coffee shop without ordering anything. Phillips, then regional manager of operations in Philadelphia, southern New Jersey, and elsewhere, was not involved with arrests. However, she said she was ordered to put a white manager who also wasn't involved on administrative leave for reasons she knew were false, according to her lawsuit.

Phillips said she was fired less than a month later after objecting to the manager being placed on leave amid the uproar, according to her lawsuit.

The company's rationale for suspending the district manager, who was not responsible for the store where the arrests took place, was an allegation that Black store managers were being paid less than white managers, according to the lawsuit. Phillips said that argument made no sense since district managers had no input on employee salaries.

The lawsuit alleged Starbucks was instead taking steps to "punish white employees" who worked in the area "in an effort to convince the community that it had properly responded to the incident."

During closing arguments on Friday, Phillips' lawyer Laura Mattiacci told jurors that the company was looking for a "sacrificial lamb" to calm the outrage and show that it was taking action, Law360 reported. Picking a Black employee for such a purpose "would have blown up in their faces," she said.

Starbucks denied Phillips' allegations, saying the company needed someone with a track record of "strength and resolution" during a crisis and replaced her with a regional manager who had such experience, including navigating the aftermath of the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings, Law360 reported.

Phillips' attorney, however, cited earlier testimony from a Black district manager, who was responsible for the store where the arrests took place, who described Phillips as someone beloved by her peers and worked around the clock after the arrests.

In an email to The Associated Press, Mattiacci confirmed the award amount and said the judge will consider awarding back pay and future pay, as well as attorney's fees. Mattiacci told the New Jersey Law Journal that she will seek about $3 million for lost pay, and roughly $1 million on her fee application. Starbucks declined comment Tuesday.

In the April 2018 incident, Rashon Nelson and Donte Robinson were arrested in a Starbucks coffee shop near Tony Rittenhouse Square in Philadelphia shortly after the manager called police to report that two men were refusing to either make a purchase or leave the premises. They were later released without charges.

Video of the arrest prompted national outcry and led the current CEO of Starbucks to personally apologize to the men. The company later reached a settlement with both men for an undisclosed sum and an offer of free college education. The company also changed store policies and closed locations across the country for an afternoon for racial-bias training.

The two men also reached a deal with the city of Philadelphia for a symbolic $1 each and a promise from officials to set up a $200,000 program for young entrepreneurs. The Philadelphia Police Department adopted a new policy on how to deal with people accused of trespassing on private property — warning businesses against misusing the authority of police officers.

NEWPORT NEWS, Va. —

Concerned staff warned administrators at a Virginia elementary school three times that a 6-year-old boy had a gun and was threatening other students in the hours before he shot and wounded a teacher, but the administration "was paralyzed by apathy" and didn't call police, remove the boy from class or lock down the school, the wounded teacher's lawyer said Wednesday.

Later in the day, the school board voted to relieve district superintendent George Parker III of his duties effective Feb. 1 as part of a separation agreement and severance package.

Diane Toscano, an attorney for Abigail Zwerner, said during a news conference that she has notified the school board in Newport News that the 25-year-old teacher at Richneck Elementary School plans to sue the school district over the Jan. 6 shooting, which left Zwerner with serious injuries.

"On that day, over the course of a few hours, three different times — three times — school administration was warned by concerned teachers and employees that the boy had a gun on him at the school and was threatening people. But the administration could not be bothered," Toscano said.

She said that Zwerner first went to an administrator at around 11:15 a.m. on the day of the shooting and said the boy had threatened to beat up another child, but no action was taken.

About an hour later, another teacher went to an administrator and said she had taken it upon herself to search the boy's bookbag, but warned that she thought the boy had put the gun in his pocket before going outside for recess, Toscano said.

"The administrator downplayed the report from the teacher and the possibility of a gun, saying — and I quote — 'Well, he has little pockets,' " Toscano said.

Shortly after 1 p.m., another teacher told an administrator that a different student who was "crying and fearful" said the boy showed him the gun during recess and threatened to shoot him if he told anyone. Again, no action was taken, she said.

When another employee who had heard the boy might have a gun asked an administrator to search the boy, he was turned down, Toscano said.

"He was told to wait the situation out because the school day was almost over," she said.

About an hour later, "Abby Zwerner was shot in front of those horrified kids, and the school and community are living the nightmare, all because the school administration failed to act," Toscano said.

"Were they not so paralyzed by apathy, they could have prevented this tragedy," she said.

School district spokesperson Michelle Price declined to comment.

"Since the school division's investigation is ongoing, I cannot comment on the statements presented by Ms. Zwerner's lawyer at this time," Price wrote in an email.

The shooting raised questions over security at the school and stunned Newport News, a city of about 185,000 people roughly 70 miles (113 kilometers) southeast of Richmond.

Parker's departure had been expected since a school board agenda was posted Tuesday showing that the panel was set to vote on his separation package. The school board announced his departure following a closed-door special meeting Wednesday evening.

The board voted 5-1 in favor of the separation agreement and severance package. Effective Feb. 1, Parker will be "relieved of his duties" as superintendent. Surles-Law said the decision was made "without cause," and said Parker has been a "capable division leader" who has served Newport News for nearly five years through challenging times.

Parker, who has been sharply criticized by parents and teachers in the wake of the shooting, has said that at least one administrator was told on the day of the shooting that the boy might have a weapon, but no weapon was found when his backpack was searched. Police have said that school officials did not tell them about that tip before the shooting, which happened hours later.

Cindy Connell, a middle school teacher in Newport News, called the events described by Toscano "beyond horrifying."

"This is just another example of administrators not listening to the concerns of teachers, and the only reason we're talking about this one is because Abby Zwerner got shot," Connell said.

"I think any administrator that was told repeatedly that this child has a weapon, we think this child has a weapon — anyone who knew about this situation and did nothing should lose their job."

Police Chief Steve Drew has repeatedly characterized the shooting as "intentional," saying the boy aimed at Zwerner and fired one round, striking her in the hand and chest. Zwerner was hospitalized for nearly two weeks but is now recovering at home, Toscano said.

"The road to full recovery will be long ... and the psychological scars will be lasting," Toscano said.

The boy's mother legally purchased the gun used in the shooting, police said. The boy's family said in a statement last week that the gun was "secured." The family's attorney, James Ellenson, told The Associated Press that his understanding was that the gun was in the woman's closet on a shelf well over 6 feet (1.8 meters) high and had a trigger lock that required a key.

The family also said in its statement that the boy has an "acute disability" and was under a care plan "that included his mother or father attending school with him and accompanying him to class every day." The week of the shooting was the first when a parent was not in class with him, the family said.

James Ellenson, an attorney for the boy's family, released a statement Wednesday saying they "continue to pray for Ms. Zwerner and wish her a complete and full recovery."

"Our hearts go out to all involved," Ellenson said.

The school, which has been closed since the shooting, is scheduled to reopen next week. Karen Lynch, a longtime principal in the Newport News school district, has been named as an "administrator on special assignment" at Richneck, Lynch said in a note to parents on Monday.

Ahead of the reopening, administrators and teachers held an Open House at the school Wednesday for students and their families to visit staff and participate in activities. Signs along the sidewalks in front of the school offered reassuring messages to the students: "You've got this," "We are Praying for You" and "You are Loved."

__

Associated Press reporter Sarah Brumfield in Silver Spring, Maryland, contributed to this report.

A Los Angeles County judge on Thursday said she will dismiss a lawsuit that the stars of 1968's “Romeo and Juliet" filed over the film's nude scene, finding that their depiction could not be considered child pornography and they filed their claim too late.

Superior Court Judge Alison Mackenzie ruled in favor of a motion from defendant Paramount Pictures to dismiss the lawsuit brought by Olivia Hussey, who played Juliet at age 15 and is now 72, and Leonard Whiting, who played Romeo at 16 and is also 72.

Mackenzie determined that the scene was protected by the First Amendment, finding that the actors “have not put forth any authority showing the film here can be deemed to be sufficiently sexually suggestive as a matter of law to be held to be conclusively illegal.”

In her written decision, she also found that the suit didn't fall within the bounds of a California law that temporarily suspended the statute of limitations for child sexual abuse, and that a February re-release of the film did not change that.

The actors' attorney denounced the decision and said they plan to file another version of the suit in federal court.

“We firmly believe that the exploitation and sexualization of minors in the film industry must be confronted and legally addressed to protect vulnerable individuals from harm and ensure the enforcement of existing laws,” lawyer Solomon Gresen said in a statement.

The film and its theme song were major hits at the time, and — despite the nude scene that briefly shows Whiting's bare buttocks and Hussey's bare breasts — it was played for generations of high school students studying Shakespeare's tragedy.

Director Franco Zeffirelli, who died in 2019 at age 96, initially told the two that they would wear flesh-colored undergarments in the bedroom scene that comes late in the movie and was shot on the final days of filming, the suit alleged.

But on the morning of the shoot, Zeffirelli told Whiting and Hussey that they would wear only body makeup, while still assuring them the camera would be positioned in a way that would not show nudity, according to the suit.

Despite those assurances, they were filmed in the nude without their knowledge, in violation of California and federal laws against indecency and the exploitation of children, the suit alleged.

Zeffirelli told them they must act in the nude “or the Picture would fail” and their careers would be hurt, the suit said. The actors said that the opposite occurred, that neither had the career the film's success suggested, and that the fraud, sexual abuse and sexual harassment they underwent caused them emotional damage and mental anguish for decades. They had sought more than $500 million in damages.

The judge, though, found that the plaintiffs “cherry-picked” from the law and failed to provide legal authority for why it should apply to “purported works of artistic merit, such as the award-winning film at issue here.”

She quoted from an appeals court precedent that said child pornography is “particularly repulsive,” but “not all images of nude children are pornographic.”

The ruling relied on California law that is meant to protect the free speech of defendants from being squelched by lawsuits, and is often the first line of defense when lawsuits are filed.

An attorney for Paramount declined to comment about the ruling.

The Associated Press typically does not name people who say they have been sexually abused unless they come forward publicly, which Hussey and Whiting did.

Aric Hutchinson is still trying to wrap his head around the idea that his wife is no longer here on Earth with him after the couple were involved in a car crash that proved fatal for her on their wedding night in South Carolina.

Now, the groom has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the alleged drunk driver involved in the crash and a number of local establishments where the driver had been "bar hopping" throughout the day, according to a news release from an attorney representing Hutchinson and the lawsuit.

While he doesn't remember the crash itself, Aric Hutchinson remembers one of the last things his new wife, Samantha Hutchinson, 34, said to him: "She wanted the night to never end," he said during an exclusive interview on "Good Morning America" on Friday.

South Carolina authorities say Jamie Lee Komoroski, 25, drove her car into the newlywed couple’s golf-cart-style vehicle.

The bride died of blunt force injuries, according to the Charleston County Coroner’s Office. Aric Hutchinson, his brother-in-law and the couple’s nephew were also injured in the crash, GMA reported.

"She (Komoroski) stole an amazing human being that should not have been taken," Aric Hutchinson said.

The lawsuit, which is also an injury lawsuit filed by the brother-in-law and nephew, claims Komoroski visited the El Gallo Bar and Grill in Charleston before making her way to Folly Beach, where she began bar hopping on Center Street, with stops at several bars and restaurants.

Video above: Husband attends paddle vigil for bride killed

CNN has reached out to the other establishments named in the suit and is awaiting comment.

"Despite being noticeably and visibly intoxicated at each of these establishments," the lawsuit states, "Jaime Komoroski continued to be served, provided, and/or allowed to consume additional alcohol at each of them."

Chris Gramiccioni, an attorney representing Komoroski in the criminal case said he and his client "ask that there not be a rush to judgment."

"We cannot fathom what the families are going through and offer our deepest sympathies," the statement said. "Our court system is founded upon principles of justice and mercy and that is where all facts will come to light."

"The state grants restaurants and bars a license for the privilege to serve alcohol, and with that privilege comes a responsibility to the community to serve patrons responsibly and to deny service to individuals who are visibly intoxicated," Danny Dalton, Hutchinson’s attorney, said.

Komoroski was a new employee of a local restaurant, Taco Boy, and her supervisor is accused of “organizing, arranging, and supervising an employee function/meeting knowing that excessive amounts of alcoholic beverages would be purchased for, served to, and consumed by the employees attending the function/meeting,” the lawsuit says.

"We can confirm with absolute certainty that Jamie Komoroski did not set foot in Taco Boy, nor did anyone on our team serve her alcohol at the restaurant," Taco Boy said in a statement in response to the lawsuit. "We have confirmed this by watching 16 hours of video footage from multiple cameras, staff interviews with everyone working that day, and by reviewing all sales receipts."

Komoroski's blood alcohol level was over three times the legal limit at the time of the crash, according to a South Carolina Law Enforcement Division toxicology report. She is now charged with one count of reckless homicide and three counts of felony DUI resulting in great bodily harm, online court records show.

Two broken legs, broken bones in his face, subsequent injuries and multiple surgeries later, Aric Hutchinson is finding comfort being back in the apartment the couple shared, he said.

“It's hard but it's also nice, he said. "It's got Sam written all over the house."

Komoroski remains in custody, jail records show.

"If this (lawsuit) stops one person from getting in their car while intoxicated, or helps someone have the courage to step up and stop that from happening, or helps an establishment really take a hard stand on over-serving people – that's something positive that can come out of out of this," Dalton said Wednesday.

The families of the people killed in the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting have reached a historic $73 million dollar settlement in a decade-long lawsuit against the maker of the AR-15 weapon the gunman used.

“Twenty children were killed and six adults and a subset of families have been working over 10 years to get some accountability by the manufacturer,” said Michael Rodriguez, professor at UCLA School of Public Health. “Guns, even though they're a consumer product, are not monitored or regulated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission. In fact, in 2005 Congress provided them immunity from being liable from any civil suits.”

That immunity from the Lawful Commerce Act is why settlements from civil suits against gun manufacturers have been hard to come by in the past, making this settlement a big breakthrough, according to professor of law Carl Tobias at the University of Richmond.

“There was an exception in Connecticut law passed by their legislature, which made Remington come within the exception,” Tobias said.

The exception in the Connecticut statute has to do with how the weapon was advertised.

“They used marketing practices that were directed to try to again provide this persona, almost to sort of elevate this macho image," Rodriguez said. "And there was also some concerns about marketing to people who may sort of be vulnerable potentially with mental health problems.”

“What's interesting is a number of other states have rather similar statutes,” Tobias said.

Tobias says this case sends a message to gun manufacturers and their insurance companies of the importance of responsible marketing practices.

“What it also shows is that in the absence of stronger national and local regulations that there's also other tools like litigation that can that that can make this industry responsible,” Rodriguez said.

Rodriguez says civil suits are one of the few tools Americans have to hold manufacturers responsible.

 

A judge threw out a lawsuit that was filed by a man who was featured on the cover of Nirvana's iconic 1991 rock album "Nevermind."

Multiple news outlets reported that Spencer Elden failed to respond to Nirvana's motion for dismissal by the Dec. 30 deadline.

According to the BBC, Judge Fernando M Olguin dismissed the case "with leave to amend," giving Elden until Jan. 13 to refile the lawsuit.

Elden, 30, was a baby when he was featured on the "Nevermind" cover. It shows him swimming nude in a pool with his genitals exposed. The photograph was shot by Erik Weddle in 1991, who was reportedly friends with Elden's father.

Elden's lawsuit accused the band of sexual exploitation and violating federal child pornography statutes.

Elden filed the lawsuit in New York against the band, surviving members Dave Grohl, Krist Novoselic and Pat Smear, the estate of Kurt Cobain, Weddle and several music catalogs, including Warner Records, MCA Music and Universal Music Group.

In the suit, Elden sought $150,000 from each defendant for what he calls "lifelong damages."

INDIANAPOLIS, Indiana — Hundreds of schools across the country have joined a lawsuit against the makers of JUUL vape products. The nationwide effort is aimed at reducing e-cigarette use among teenagers. While it's been an ongoing suit over the last few years, the latest to join is Indianapolis Public Schools.

Amy Peak is the director of Undergraduate Health Science Programs at Butler University. She points out the prominence of underage e-cigarette use is still a major health issue they are working to combat.

“From a health professional standpoint, the challenge is we haven’t done anything to decrease nicotine addiction. While we have absolutely decreased combustible cigarette smoking, we’ve just replaced those risks with different types of risks," Peak said.

School districts from California to New York have signed onto a lawsuit that could shape the future of e-cigarettes. The districts claim that JUUL Labs. Inc. targeted teens in the marketing of their products, harming the schools that educate those kids in the process.

“We are shifting the risk so maybe the risk isn’t as much lung cancer as it was previously, but we see completely different types of lung disease. We see higher addiction rates and then we see more gateways into other things," Peak said.

Peak says the problem, at this point, reaches far beyond JUUL.

“I think that JUUL was the leader of the pack. It became a verb not a noun. People juuled, they were juuling," Peak said.

The company stopped selling flavored products in 2019. They also pulled all U.S. advertising.

“They have taken some very responsible steps and likely ahead of some legislation that was inevitable," Peak said.

Windi Hornsby is the parent of two students within Indianapolis public schools.

“I think about how easy it was for me to start smoking, I can’t imagine how much easier it is for a kid to, if they can get their hands on it, to become addicted to some fruit-flavored to candy flavor e-cigarette," Hornsby said. “I think that’s just another facet for our school district caring about our children’s safety.”

She worries this lawsuit won’t go far enough to fight teenage e-cigarette use.

"It needs to be targeted as an industry-wide thing which would probably come with legislation and our law makers doing something on that end," Hornsby said.

More than 2 million U.S. youth currently use e-cigarettes, according to the 2021 Annual National Youth Tobacco Survey. Of that group, most teenagers are using flavored e-cigs. About 1 in 4 use them daily.

“So, what you see now are things like puff bars that are all of those really enticing flavors. There is no difference between a puff bar and a JUUL, other than one is not a reusable device," Peak said.

JUUL says it is trying to be responsible. In response to the survey the company acknowledged, “We will only be trusted to provide alternatives to adult smokers if we continue to combat underage use, respect the central role of our regulator and build on our shared commitment to science and evidence.”

“I think there is a misperception that e-cigarettes aren’t as dangerous. You can’t see the tobacco-like you can see it in a cigarette. So, I do wonder if people just think oh this is safer and you do hear about people going to e-cigarettes as a ween to go off of smoking,"Hornsby said.

“Very often, it’s to self medicate for anxiety that’s uncontrolled, sometimes it’s from a depression standpoint. The use of nicotine and other addictive substances and mental health disorders go hand in hand," Peak said.

Peak says we can’t combat this issue, without working on a larger issue: adolescent mental health.

“I’m very concerned that we have a larger number of youth addicted to nicotine than we had previously, we were making good progress and all of that progress is going away," Peak said.

A federal judge overseeing litigation related to the nation's opioid epidemic ruled Tuesday that lawsuits targeting Purdue Pharma and other drug companies can move to trial even as the OxyContin maker tries to reach a settlement.

The ruling was one of several issued by U.S. District Court Judge Dan Polster, who is preparing for a trial scheduled for Oct. 21 over claims from the Ohio counties of Cuyahoga and Summit.

It would be the first federal trial seeking to hold drug companies, distributors and pharmacies accountable for an overdose and addiction crisis that has killed more than 400,000 Americans since 2000. More than 2,000 local governments have sued the industry, with most of the cases gathered in multidistrict litigation under Polster. The first trial is partly intended to answer legal questions that could arise in others that would follow if a settlement can't be reached.

Polster issued six rulings Tuesday denying motions for summary judgment from various groups of defendants, who had hoped to have at least some claims against them tossed out. While it's not a surprise that Polster denied the requests, the decisions strengthen the plaintiffs' positions with the initial trial less than two months away.

He ruled that civil conspiracy claims against the companies that make, distribute and sell opioids can remain in the case. In his opinion, Polster wrote that it's for a jury to decide whether there is enough evidence to show the companies' actions meet the criteria of a conspiracy claim.

Some of the defendants also sought to have claims tossed out because of conflicts between the underlying state and federal laws; Polster denied those, as well.

Polster also made rulings specific to certain defendants or groups of them. He found that claims should not be dropped against Mallinckrodt, Teva and Actavis, three makers of generic drugs.

They argued that there was no proof they had marketed their generic opioids during certain time periods, but plaintiffs in the case responded that the companies had indeed done marketing. They pointed to their sponsorship of patient advocacy groups that called for more access to pain treatment.

The judge also ruled against a group of smaller drug distributors. They had argued that lawsuits against them should be tossed out because their involvement in the opioids industry was too small to make a difference.

In recent weeks, Polster has ruled against several efforts to keep expert witnesses from testifying on behalf of the local governments.

It's not clear just which defendants might be included when the trial begins. Last month, drugmakers Endo and Allergan settled claims with the two Ohio counties, and more settlements could come in the weeks ahead.

Purdue, a company strongly associated with the opioid epidemic through its OxyContin drug, has proposed settlement terms that would have the Stamford, Connecticut-based company file for a structured bankruptcy and pay $10 billion to $12 billion to settle all claims against it. The Sackler family, which owns Purdue, would pay $3 billion under the proposal and contribute an estimated $1.5 billion more from the sale of another company they own, Mundipharma.

Since details of the deal became public last week, some local officials and state attorneys general have pushed back, saying the amount of money offered is too small. Others have said they want people affected by the opioid epidemic to have a chance to address company executives in court.

Last month, a state judge in Oklahoma ruled that Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiaries must pay $572 million in the first state-court verdict on the opioid crisis. Purdue and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries settled with the state before the trial began.

Meanwhile, Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost has sued to stop the trials involving the Ohio local governments' claims, saying the state's lawsuit should go first.

LOS ANGELES —

Vanessa Bryant wants a judge to punish Los Angeles County officials for destroying photos of Kobe Bryant's helicopter crash that were allegedly shared, according to court papers filed by her lawyers.

Related video above: How Vanessa Bryant found out about the deaths of her daughter and husband

"Law enforcement officials whose job is to investigate wrongdoing know that the first step in investigating a complaint is to preserve evidence and that destroying evidence is improper," said the motion, filed on Monday. "Yet that is exactly what Sheriff (Alex) Villanueva himself ordered Department personnel to do after the Department received a citizen's complaint that a Sheriff's deputy was showing photos of the crash site at a bar in Norwalk. That order was highly irregular — unprecedented in deputies' experience — and out of the chain of command."

Photos of the January 2020 helicopter crash that killed the NBA legend, his daughter, and seven others, were allegedly shared with people outside of the investigation. In March 2020, L.A. County Sheriff Villanueva said all of those photos had been deleted. Bryant is suing the county over the alleged photo sharing claiming emotional distress, and a violation of privacy.

"In these circumstances, it is simply unfair to let Defendants argue that the photos were contained and that the risk of trauma is illusory," said Bryant's lawyers in a motion filed Tuesday. Lawyers request summary judgment, trial, and an order precluding defendants from arguing that the photos were not spread electronically.

"While the County continues to have the deepest sympathy for the grief Ms. Bryant has suffered, the request by her lawyers for sanctions is an attempt to distract attention from the fact that none of the routine investigative photos taken by County employees have ever been publicly disseminated," said Skip Miller, partner of the Miller Barondess law firm and outside counsel for L.A. County.

The matter is expected to be discussed on Nov. 29 in Los Angeles.

SHEFFIELD LAKE, Ohio — A local police officer who says he was the butt of a racist joke made by a former chief of police has filed a discrimination charge against the city. The officer, Kieth Pool, is also seeking the release of public documents regarding other racist incidents allegedly involving Sheffield Lake's former top cop.

The catalyst was an incident involving Pool that was captured on camera inside the station on June 25.

Footage of the incident shows Sheffield Lake chief of police Anthony Campo placing a folded piece of paper over the world "police" on a yellow raincoat lying on a desk.

While it's not clear what was written on the piece of paper, in a June interview, the Sheffield Lake law director said that "from my understanding, (the writing) was related to the KKK."

Later, Pool, who is Black, entered the room, and Campo pointed out the piece of paper to him. After Campo left the room, Pool had a discussion with several other officers in the room.

Sheffield Lake

"Even when I watch it now, I am in disbelief that this happened to me," Pool said in a Zoom interview with his legal representation present.

Pool said that after showing him the raincoat, Campo called over other officers to see what he had done.

"My my exact words were, are you serious? And I just looked at him and left it," Pool said. "What else can you say to the chief of police who's done something so heinous? It's so awful."

Sheffield Lake PD chief retires following incident at station

Department records show that the chief was placed on administrative leave on June 29 pending an investigation into the matter. Campo submitted his retirement notice the same day he was placed on leave.

Records show Campo was with the department for 33 years.

Campo later said that the incident was a "joke that got out of hand."

According to the law firm Peiffer Wolf Carr Kane & Conway, which represents Pool, Campo's conduct goes beyond a single joke.

"Our investigation has revealed that Chief Campo referred to Officer Pool as the 'n-word' and said he did not want an 'n-word' working in his department," said Ashlie Case Sletvold, a partner with Peiffer Wolf Carr Kane & Conway.

The law firm also claims the city has kept public records under wraps that allegedly detail additional incidents of harassment by Campo toward other officers of color.

"This was not the first time doing something racist and offensive to me or other employees," Pool said. "It was just the first time they got caught on video."

The charge seeks the release of other documents showing "racist images Campo generated and posted while on duty."

"The city provided the surveillance video and other records but failed to provide the racist images Campo created to mock and humiliate employees of color or various official memoranda he issued during his tenure," the law firm said.

According to the law firm, Campo used police department equipment to create and print out offensive images, which were left on the desks of other officers.

"The images included one of Officer Pool as the grim reaper (describing him as 'The Raccoon Reaper')," the firm wrote.

Another image that was printed out allegedly portrayed another officer of color, the law firm stated.

"Because the City of Sheffield Lake has not fully complied with its obligations under the Ohio Public Records Act, Officer Pool's attorneys have asked the state's highest court to mandate the release of these public records," the law firm wrote.

So far, the city has only provided the surveillance video relating to the incident involving Pool, the law firm said.

"The city's failure to turn over the public records documenting his misconduct makes me feel like they want to protect the ex-chief," Pool said.

"If it wasn't bad enough that the former police chief was engaged in rampant racist workplace harassment, now the city that hired him appears to be helping to cover it up," said Joseph C. Peiffer, the managing partner of Peiffer Wolf Carr Kane & Conway. "Racial harassment has no place in law enforcement, and we will ensure that the City of Sheffield Lake will face a reckoning for all of the despicable behavior conducted by its former Police Chief."

Pool, who still works for the department under the new chief, Andrew Kory, calls it a healthier environment than under Campo.

"Working there since the incident and the removal of Chief Campo has been more upbeat," he said.

The law firm has filed a discrimination charge with the Ohio Civil Rights Commission (OCRC) and a mandamus petition with the Ohio Supreme Court regarding the matter.

According to documents provided by the law firm, Ohio law prohibits individuals from bringing a lawsuit in state court until they have first filed a charge with the OCRC and received a Notice of Right to Sue.

It will be up to the Ohio Supreme Court to decide how to handle the case and the OCRC to investigate the charge.

This story was originally published by Drew Scofield and Nadeen Abusada on Scripps station WEWS in Cleveland.

LOS ANGELES —

Two California couples gave birth to each others' babies after a mix-up at a fertility clinic and spent months raising children that weren't theirs before swapping the infants, according to a lawsuit filed Monday in Los Angeles.

Daphna Cardinale said she and her husband, Alexander, had immediate suspicions that the girl she gave birth to in late 2019 wasn't theirs because the child had a darker complexion than they do.

They suppressed their doubts because they fell in love with the baby and trusted the in vitro fertilization process and their doctors, Daphna said. Learning months later that she had been pregnant with another couple's baby, and that another woman had been carrying her child, caused enduring trauma, she said.

"I was overwhelmed by feelings of fear, betrayal, anger and heartbreak," Daphna said during a news conference with her husband announcing the lawsuit. "I was robbed of the ability to carry my own child. I never had the opportunity to grow and bond with her during pregnancy, to feel her kick."

The Cardinales' complaint accuses the Los Angeles-based California Center for Reproductive Health (CCRH) and its owner, Dr. Eliran Mor, of medical malpractice, breach of contract, negligence and fraud. It demands a jury trial and seeks unspecified damages.

Yvonne Telles, the office administrator for the center, declined to comment on Monday. Mor could not be reached for comment.

The two other parents involved in the alleged mix-up wish to remain anonymous and plan a similar lawsuit in the coming days, according to attorney Adam Wolf, who represents all four parents.

The lawsuit claims CCRH mistakenly implanted the other couple's embryo into Daphna and transferred the Cardinales' embryo — made from Daphna's egg and Alexander's sperm — into the other woman.

The babies, both girls, were born a week apart in September 2019. Both couples unwittingly raised the wrong child for nearly three months before DNA tests confirmed that the embryos were swapped, according to the filing.

"The Cardinales, including their young daughter, fell in love with this child, and were terrified she would be taken away from them," the complaint says. "All the while, Alexander and Daphna did not know the whereabouts of their own embryo, and thus were terrified that another woman had been pregnant with their child — and their child was out in the world somewhere without them."

The babies were swapped back in January 2020.

Mix-ups like this are exceedingly rare, but not unprecedented. In 2019 a couple from Glendale, California, sued a separate fertility clinic, claiming their embryo was mistakenly implanted in a New York woman, who gave birth to their son as well as a second boy belonging to another couple.

Wolf, whose firm specializes in fertility cases, called for greater oversight for IVF clinics.

"This case highlights an industry in desperate need of federal regulation," he said.

Breaking the news to their older daughter, now 7, that doctors made a mistake and that the new baby wasn't actually her sister "was the hardest thing in my life," Daphna said.

"My heart breaks for her, perhaps the most," she said.

Since the mix-up came to light, both babies have been returned to their biological families. All four parents have since made an effort to stay in each other's lives and "forge a larger family," Daphna said.

"They were just as much in love with our biological daughter as we were with theirs," Alexander said.

Three former inmates have reportedly filed a federal civil rights lawsuit after they say they were forced to listen to the children's song “Baby Shark" on repeat.

According to The Oklahoman, they are suing Oklahoma County commissioners, the county sheriff, the jail trust and two former officers at the jail.

An investigation found the officers handcuffed the inmates to a wall and played the song loudly, over and over, as a form of punishment, The Kansas City Star reported. The lawsuit reportedly compares the action to torture.

The officers were charged in 2020. They are scheduled to go to trial in February, The Oklahoman reports.

The inmates are reportedly seeking $75,000 in damages.

Video above: U.S. mandates vaccines or tests for big companies

More than half of the states in the country have filed or signed on to lawsuits challenging the Biden administration's federal vaccine mandate for large companies.

The law, which is set to take effect Jan. 4, would require companies with 100 employees or more as well as any federal contractors to mandate the vaccine or start weekly testing of their workers. This would impact more than 84 million workers, roughly 31 million of whom are unvaccinated.

At least 27 states s0 far, most of which are Republican-led, have decided to take legal action against the new rules, claiming the mandate is an example of federal overreach and both "unlawful and unconstitutional."

Florida kicked off the states' legal pushback against the mandate, with Gov. Ron DeSantis announcing the Sunshine State's lawsuit on Oct. 29.

"Just months ago, Joe Biden was saying that it wouldn’t be appropriate or lawful for the federal government to mandate these COVID shots," DeSantis said. "But now we have somehow gone from 15 days to slow the spread to 3 jabs to keep your job. The federal government is exceeding their power and it is important for us to take a stand because in Florida we believe these are choices based on individual circumstances."

Labor Secretary Marty Walsh said he stands by the mandate, adding that the administration is well-prepared for the avalanche of legal battles.

"We're confident about the rule put together, and I think it's unfortunate that this rule has been out for about eight hours now and people already are suing on it," Walsh said on "All Things Consider," an NPR news program. "This is about protecting workers in the workplace. This is about protecting Americans. This is about increasing our number of people in this country that are vaccinated."

Hearst station WPBF contributed to this report.

Police reform has been at the forefront of protests the past few weeks, following the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis.

The qualified immunity doctrine is getting a lot of attention.

“Qualified immunity is a doctrine that was created by the Supreme Court in 1967 in a case called Pierson v. Ray, and when the Supreme Court announced the existence of qualified immunity, they described it as a good faith defense,” Joanna Schwartz, a professor at the UCLA School of Law, said.

However, there have been debates on how this doctrine can be used.

In recent weeks, Congressman Justin Amash proposed the “Ending Qualified Immunity Act” (H.R. 7085).

“Qualified immunity is just another example of a justice system that is not working for people, and preventing people from getting the redress they deserve,” Representative Justin Amash (L-Michigan) said.

So, we dove into qualified immunity with Joanna Shwartz, a law professor who studies civil rights litigation, and Justin Smith, a sheriff in Larimer County, Colorado.

“Qualified immunity first of all has nothing to do with criminal immunity,” Sheriff Justin Smith said.

Smith has been with the Larimer County Sheriff’s Department for nearly three decades.

“Who in their right mind would build a career on running towards gun fire and confronting an armed suspect? Why would you do it without some type of civil protection?,” he explained.

We sat down with him as he explained why qualified immunity is important for his officers.

“I’d simply ask the question to the average American, is a police officer expected to be perfect in all of their actions in a split second?,” he asked.

Smith said without qualified immunity, one incorrect decision made by an officer could cost a lot.

“If you didn’t call that exactly right by one judges interpretation, that's a lawsuit,” he said.

“Every time the officer puts on the shirt, the badge, straps on the firearm, comes to work, every action they take responding to a case essentially is as if they went to Vegas and they walked up to the table, placed a five dollar bet, and in Colorado for example, would cost them up to $100,000. Who's going to make that bet?,” Smith explained.

However, those who want qualified immunity removed say the doctrine has changed over the years and it’s not necessary to protect officers who act in good faith when it comes to protection of rights.

“Concerns about split second decision making...are already protected from liability by the Supreme Court's construction of what the Fourth Amendment allows. Qualified immunity is unnecessary to do that,” Schwartz explained.

She went on to explain why she believes that qualified immunity isn’t necessary for the protection of money, either.

“I studied lawsuit payouts across the country over several years, I found that police officer personally contributed .02 percent of the total dollars paid to plaintiffs,” she said.

Schwartz said while the doctrine was originally created as a good faith defense, it has changed over the years to make it harder for people to file lawsuits against officers.

“In order to defeat qualified immunity, find a prior case with virtually identical facts in which a court announced that that conduct was unconstitutional,” she said.

Which has been an issue for James King from Michigan, who told a reporter he was assaulted by an officer in plain clothes in a mistaken identity case. The incident was caught on camera back in July 2014.

“The simple fact is the majority of this time this situation happens to anyone, they have no recourse,” King said.

Officers are often forced to make decisions in a split second.

“This is a risk taking profession,” Smith said. “We can say the criminal justice system isn't perfect and that's accurate. Nothing in society is perfect. I think it’s overall improved significantly over the years.”

But Schwartz thinks officers acting in good faith can be protected by other measures.

“Qualified immunity is not necessary or well suited to play that role in weeding out insubstantial cases,” she said.

Both Smith and Schwartz agree that when looking at proposed changes to qualified immunity on the federal and state level, it’s important to look at what officers the bill is including -- whether that be local, county, state, or federal officers.

“Congress’ bills at this moment only end qualified immunity for state and local officials,” Schwartz explained. “As we are thinking about state and local law enforcement, we should not overlook the role of federal law enforcement and other government officials.”

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — James Brown, the Godfather of Soul, had a dying wish to help educate needy children.

But his estate has been held up by 14 years of legal battles.

Now the South Carolina Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that Tomi Rae Hynie, a former partner of Brown's who claimed to be his wife, was not legally married to the singer due to her failure to annul a previous marriage, and therefore has no right to his estate.

Brown's union with Hynie has long been the center of the evolving legal troubles following his death at the age of 73 on Christmas Day 2006.