Razumich & Associates, P.C. - April 2023

... continued from Cover

This is where rap lyrics are often used in legal proceedings, with graphic lines portraying violence or drugs to make the jury believe these are literal facts and that a defendant is a bad person. However, in New Jersey v. Skinner , the state of New Jersey argued that rapper Vonte Skinner’s lyrics were actual evidence, proving that he had the motive to kill. One of the most contested lyrics from the case was “[he] wouldn’t listen, so I hit him with the Smithen,” and the court argued the line itself was proof that Skinner committed the attempted murder. While you may be thinking, “Well, why would he even say that?” Think of all the times you frustratingly told a friend, “If you do that, I’ll kill you!” or even a simple “break a leg!” Did you mean it? Certainly not, and many things we say daily aren’t meant to be taken literally. So, in the summer of 2022, the U.S. House of Representatives introduced the Restoring Artistic Protection or RAP Act, which would effectively ban all lyrics from being used in court unless they meet specific requirements. This bill states that as an artist, a rapper’s lyrics are part of their artistic expression and are simply an act of creativity. However, lyrics may be admissible if they specifically refer to the crime in question or if “the expression has distinct probative value not provided by other admissible evidence.”

In the case of New Jersey v. Skinner , the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that Skinner’s lyrics should never have been used as evidence. But on a federal level, the RAP act is still making its way through the legislative process, so for now, the ability to use lyrics in court remains uncertain.

CHEESE AND DESIST! McDonald’s Customers Sue for Being Forced to Pay for Cheese

In Fort Lauderdale, Florida, things got a little crazy! Two McDonald’s customers sued the fast-food chain for $5 million, alleging they were unfairly charged when they ordered Quarter Pounders without cheese. According to the lawsuit, the fast-food restaurant chain historically had four menu options: a Quarter Pounder with cheese, a Double Quarter Pounder with cheese, a Quarter Pounder, and a Double Quarter Pounder. The “with cheese” options were roughly between 30 cents and 90 cents more expensive than the “without cheese” burgers. At some point, McDonald’s discontinued the “without cheese” options.

These customers ordered Quarter Pounders but asked for no cheese on their burger, and they did not receive cheese on their burger but were charged the same price as a Quarter Pounder with cheese. Their lawsuit states that they, and other customers who do not want cheese on their burgers, are forced to pay for two slices of cheese anyway, and they sued for damages as a result of being overcharged and required to pay for American cheese when they did not want or receive it on their burger. According to USA Today, a McDonald’s spokesperson advised that the company does its best to allow customers to customize their food orders. If someone doesn’t want cheese

Only a Quarter Pounder with cheese and a Double Quarter Pounder with cheese were available at the time these two customers visited the restaurant. The ingredients listed on McDonald’s website for these items include a sesame seed bun, quarter-pound 100% beef patty, ketchup, onions, pasteurized processed American cheese, and pickle slices.

as it is listed on the menu, the fast- food chain will not include cheese, thus they didn’t think the lawsuit has any merit. And because the McDonald’s customers failed to prove they were damaged by an overcharge, the case was dismissed!

2 • www.lawyersreadytofight.com

Made with FlippingBook Ebook Creator