Indiana
Judge calls AG’s TikTok lawsuit largely ‘political posturing’
INDIANAPOLIS (AP) — The fate of the Indiana attorney general’s lawsuit against the social media company TikTok is uncertain after a federal judge lambasted much of the case as “political posturing.”
While U.S. District Judge Holly Brady ruled against TikTok’s request to move the case to federal court, that decision leaves the lawsuit brought by Republican Attorney General Todd Rokita in the hands of a county judge who last month ruled against Rokita on two key points. The state attorney general claims the Chinese-owned video-sharing platform misleads users about its level of inappropriate content and about the security of consumer information. A county judge has already said the attorney general is wrong to classify downloading TikTok as a consumer transaction because no money is exchanged, and that Indiana lacks standing in the case because both TikTok and Apple — the company where people download the app — are based in California.
The most recent blow came May 23, when Brady wrote in a decision that “more than 90% of the (lawsuit) was devoted to irrelevant posturing.”
“When one wades through the political posturing and finds that legal claim, the inescapable conclusion is that the claim rises and falls on matters particular to state law,” Brady, a Fort Wayne, Indiana-based judge nominated by then-President Donald Trump, wrote. “The federal intrigue interjected by Indiana may interest its intended audience -- one beyond the courthouse wall -- but it is irrelevant to the determination of this case.”
Indiana’s lawsuit, which was filed in December, makes arguments similar to those by many state and federal lawmakers and government officials who have said they worry that the Chinese government could harvest U.S. user data from TikTok and use the platform to push pro-Beijing misinformation or messages to the public. TikTok, which is owned by the Chinese tech giant ByteDance, has said it has never been asked to hand over its data to the Chinese government and has denied Indiana’s claims about inappropriate content.
The state attorney general’s office did not immediately comment Monday on Brady’s decision or the lawsuit’s future. TikTok’s attorneys and the ByteDance media office didn’t immediately reply to requests for comment either.
Brady’s decision keeps the lawsuit in state courts, where a judge last month denied Rokita’s request for a preliminary injunction prohibiting TikTok from stating in online app stores that it has “none” or “infrequent/mild” references to drugs, sexual or other inappropriate content for children as young as 12.
Judge Craig Bobay of Allen County Superior Court in Fort Wayne also ruled that downloading TikTok’s free app doesn’t amount to a consumer transaction and said the attorney general’s office was unlikely to win at trial.
The attorney general’s office hasn’t said whether it will appeal Bobay’s decision.
New York
Cuba Gooding Jr. settles civil sex abuse case
NEW YORK (AP) — Just as a trial was to begin, it was revealed Tuesday that Cuba Gooding Jr. has settled accusations that he raped a woman in a New York City hotel a decade ago, according to court records. The actor had insisted through lawyers that his encounter with the woman was consensual after the two met at a nearby restaurant.
The trial was to start with jury selection in New York federal court as the Oscar-winning “Jerry Maguire” star faced allegations that he met the woman in Manhattan, persuaded her to join him at a hotel, and convinced her to stop at his room so he could change clothing.
Minutes after jurors were to begin assembling in a courtroom, a calendar entry in the official court record said: “TRIAL OFF.” It added: “Reason for cancellation (on consent): the parties have resolved the matter.”
The woman had proceeded anonymously until last week, when Judge Paul A. Crotty ruled that she would have to reveal her name at trial. She said in her lawsuit that Gooding raped her in his room. His lawyers, though, insisted that it was consensual sex and that she bragged afterward to others that she had sex with a celebrity.
The lawsuit sought $6 million in damages. Attorney Gloria Allred, one of several representing the woman, declined comment. Other lawyers, including those representing Gooding, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The lawsuit was filed against a man who authorities say has been accused of committing sexual misconduct against more than 30 other women, including groping, unwanted kissing and other inappropriate behavior.
Late last week, the judge seemed to strengthen the woman’s hand at trial and in settlement negotiations by ruling that he would let three women testify that they also were subjected to sudden sexual assaults or attempted sexual assaults after meeting Gooding in social settings such as festivals, bars, nightclubs and restaurants.
One of the women who had planned to testify at the trial was Kelsey Harbert, who told police Gooding fondled her without her consent at Magic Hour Rooftop Bar & Lounge near Times Square in 2019.
Harbert said last year after Gooding pleaded guilty in New York state court to a charge that spared him from jail or a criminal history that never getting her day in court was “more disappointing than words can say.”
The Associated Press does not typically identify people who say they have been sexually assaulted unless they grant permission, as Harbert has done.
Gooding, a star in films including “Boyz n the Hood” and “Radio,” was permitted to plead guilty in April 2022 to a misdemeanor, admitting that he forcibly kissed a worker at a New York nightclub in 2018.
By staying out of trouble and completing six months of alcohol and behavioral counseling, Gooding was permitted to withdraw his guilty plea and plead guilty to a non-criminal harassment violation, eliminating his criminal record and preventing further penalties.
California
Ex-correctional officer at federal prison convicted of sexual abuse
OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) — A former federal correctional officer was convicted Monday of sexually abusing two inmates at a women’s prison in California where the warden and other employees were charged with similar conduct.
A jury found the officer, John Russell Bellhouse, guilty on five counts of sexual abuse for incidents involving the two women between 2019 and 2020 at FCI Dublin, about 20 miles (30 kilometers) east of Oakland.
Bellhouse, 40, was scheduled to be sentenced in August.
“My clients feel heard,” Jessica Pride, an attorney for the victims, told KTVU-TV. “Regardless of a prisoner’s crime, sexual assault is not part of their punishment.”
Prosecutors alleged in court documents that Bellhouse “began to express an interest in a particular female inmate and started calling the inmate his ‘girlfriend’” in 2020. Authorities said he inappropriately touched the woman and that she performed oral sex on Bellhouse twice in the prison’s safety office.
All sexual activity between a prison worker and an inmate is illegal.
Prosecutors said Bellhouse allowed one woman to use an office phone — a violation of Bureau of Prisons policy — and also gave her earrings. Another inmate was tasked to act like a lookout during at least one of the sexual encounters, prosecutors said.
An attorney for Bellhouse, Shaffy Moeel, didn’t immediately return a call seeking comment.
Bellhouse is the sixth employee at the prison to be charged with sexually abusing inmates. The prison’s former warden, Ray Garcia, was convicted in December of molesting inmates and forcing them to pose naked in their cells. He was sentenced to serve six years in prison.
An Associated Press investigation revealed a culture of abuse and cover-up that had persisted for years at the facility.
Since the AP’s investigation, the Bureau of Prisons launched new training for prison wardens and created specialized teams aimed at curtailing sexual abuse at the nation’s federal prisons.
Delaware
State Supreme Court upholds finding that Tesla acquisition of Solar City was fair
DOVER, Del. (AP) — Delaware’s Supreme Court has upheld a judge’s decision in favor of Tesla CEO Elon Musk in a lawsuit challenging the electric car maker’s $2.4 billion acquisition of a solar panel company founded by two of his cousins.
The court on Tuesday rejected arguments from a group of Tesla shareholders that a Chancery Court judge erred in finding that Tesla’s deal to acquire SolarCity in 2016 was “entirely fair.” The judge made that determination even while finding that the process by which Tesla’s board of directors negotiated and recommended the deal to shareholders was “far from perfect.”
While noting errors in the trial court’s fair price analysis, and agreeing that the deal process was not “pitch perfect,” the justices said the record is replete with factual findings and credibility determinations indicating that the acquisition was “entirely fair.”
“We are convinced, after a thorough review of the extensive trial record, that the trial court’s decision is supported by the evidence and that the court committed no reversible error in applying the entire fairness test,” Justice Karen Valihura wrote in the court’s 106-page opinion.
Typically, under Delaware’s “business judgment” rule, courts give deference to a corporate board’s decision-making unless there is evidence that directors had conflicts or acted in bad faith. If a plaintiff can overcome the business judgment rule’s presumption because the deal involved a controlling shareholder or because directors might have been conflicted, the board’s action is subject to an “entire fairness” analysis. That shifts the burden to the corporation to show that the deal involved both fair dealing and fair price.
At the time of the acquisition, Musk owned about 22% of Tesla’s common stock and was the largest stockholder of SolarCity, as well as chairman of its board of directors.
The justices concluded that the findings by former Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights III, which were not challenged by the shareholders, support the conclusion that the overall deal process was the product of fair dealing. The Supreme Court also said that, while Slights failed to explain why and how he relied on Solar City’s stock price on the day the deal was announced, rather than the lower price on the day the deal closed, his fair price analysis did not amount to reversible error.
“The Court of Chancery, after examining all of the expert testimony and fair price evidence, found that the fair price case was not even close,” Valihiura noted.
An attorney for the shareholders argued in March that the Chancery Court judge put too much emphasis on the price Tesla paid for SolarCity, and not enough on the deal process, which the plaintiffs contend was tainted by the failure to appoint an independent committee to negotiate the deal. He also argued that the judge’s analysis of the deal price was flawed and that shareholders who voted to approve the deal were not properly informed, even though the vote was not required under Delaware law.
A lawyer for Musk noted that the SolarCity acquisition had been a strategic objective for Tesla for 10 years before the deal was completed, belying the argument that it was a last-minute “bailout” to save an insolvent SolarCity from bankruptcy.
The Chancery Court’s decision last year followed a July 2021 court appearance in which a defiant Musk defended the deal and sparred with attorneys for the plaintiffs, calling one lawyer a “bad human being.” Musk chose to fight the lawsuit in court even after other directors on Tesla’s board reached a $60 million settlement, without admitting fault.
