News in Brief August 12 – Pokémon Go, NFL and More

Another Pokémon Go Lawsuit Filed

Well, that didn’t take long. Another suit has been filed against the makers of the app Pokémon Go by a Canadian woman who was less than thrilled that her Alberta home became a Pokéstop. For those of you who don’t know, Pokéstops are locations where players can collect more Pokéballs and get one stop closer to catching ‘em all. The woman claims that she can’t enjoy her home with hundreds flocking to it and that the makers of the game are responsible for the nuisance. You can read more about the Pokémon lawsuits and how we think they will fair in court here.

More Schools Brought into Retirement Plan Fight

Earlier this week, we reported that Yale, MIT and NYU were hit with lawsuits saying that employees are getting charged excessive fees in connection with their retirement plans. Well, now a few more names can be added to the list of colleges facing such claims. On Wednesday, Johns Hopkins, Duke, Vanderbilt and the University of Pennsylvania were all hit with similar suits. Plaintiffs allege that if the schools had lived up to their fiduciary duties, plan participants never would have lost out on money.

Suit Filed Over Cancelled NFL Hall of Fame Game

NFL fans aren’t happy that the Hall of Fame Game in Ohio was cancelled – and now they’re taking their fight to the courtroom. The ticketholders claim that the NFL and Hall of Fame intentionally failed to tell them that the game was going to be cancelled, encouraging them to continuing purchasing drinks, food and merchandise inside the stadium. What’s worse is that some traveled across state lines to see the game, only to be told that they didn’t have seats. The suit claims the game was cancelled because of mismanagement at the stadium and seeks compensation for ticketholders’ out-of-pocket expenses. These expenses include travel and lodging costs, as well as money spent at a game that never was.

DoorDash Suit Sent to Arbitration

Consumers claiming that food delivery service DoorDash misleadingly inflates their prices must resolve their claims in arbitration. The company, which delivers local restaurant food directly to consumers, allegedly charges a delivery fee and increases the cost of menu items themselves. Though the plaintiffs tried to allege the arbitration agreement was applied unfairly, the judge granted DoorDash’s motion to compel arbitration. You can learn more about why arbitration clauses present a threat to consumers here.