Legal

Apple and Amazon.com customers were notified on Tuesday of opportunities to get money back as a result of two legal settlements with the government. Both cases revolved around Apple. Apple emailed customers eligible for a refund related to a federal complaint that children could make purchases in iPhone or iPad apps without adequate parental consent. In January, Apple reached an agreement with the Federal Trade Commission to pay at least $32.5 million in refunds. In another email, Amazon notified customers about store credit they received for e-book purchases, a result of a settlement reached with five major book publishers. 

The U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments Tuesday in the latest challenge to the Obama health care overhaul. This time the issue is whether for-profit corporations, citing religious objections, may refuse to provide some, or potentially all, contraceptive services in health plans offered to employees. It's a case that touches lots of hot-button issues. In enacting the ACA, Congress required large employers to provide basic preventive care for employees. That turned out to include all 20 contraceptive methods approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Under the law, religious nonprofits were exempted from this requirement, but for-profit corporations were not.

The National Retail Federation (NRF) expressed disappointment in a court decision that will keep the Federal Reserve's cap on debit card swipe fees at 21 cents rather than reducing it to a lower level. "NRF is disappointed and remains confident that the Federal Reserve erred when it set the swipe fee cap far higher than intended by Congress," NRF Senior Vice President and General Counsel Mallory Duncan said. "The Fed ignored congressional intent and worked to shield debit card companies and big banks. A self-described victory for the banks usually results in higher costs for consumers."

KlearGear, an online retailer that gained notoriety after charging a married couple $3,500 for writing a bad review, failed to appear in court to defend itself on allegations that it violated fair credit laws. As a result, a federal judge found the retailer had "defaulted." That order paves the way for the couple to ask the judge to order KlearGear to pay damages. Their lawyer, Scott Michelman of the advocacy group Public Citizen, says he intends to do so. The default finding marks the latest chapter in a saga that began in 2008.

Target has been sued by Swatch Group, which accused the second-largest U.S. discount retailer of illegally selling watches that copy its own. In a lawsuit made public on Monday in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, Swatch, which is known for its plastic namesake watches, accused Target of infringing its designs for "zebra" and "multicolor" watches. Swatch said the quality of Target's watches is "inferior" to its own, and that their continued sale is likely to confuse shoppers and damage the Swiss company's sales.

CVS could face as much as $29 million in fines for allegedly losing track of prescription painkillers at four of its California stores, from which authorities said thousands of pills may have been sold on the black market. Officials at the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and the California Board of Pharmacy said Monday that more than 37,000 pills were apparently taken from CVS stores. Meanwhile, CVS pharmacists in Southern California said they've been instructed by the drugstore chain to get their paperwork in order so that no other prescription meds are found to be missing.

In a falling out between two e-commerce companies, a Bay Area art retailer was sued on Tuesday for allegedly hacking into the computer servers of another internet retailer and stealing swathes of consumer information. Gotham City Online, a website that sells discount brand-name shoes, sued Art.com, an Emeryville, Calif.-based company that sells fine art online, in the U.S. District Court in San Francisco, claiming trade secret violations and computer fraud. According to the lawsuit, Art.com illegally accessed Gotham City's servers and changed the security passwords and ownership credentials to prevent Gotham City employees from accessing email or company files.

An online shopper from Rhode Island, A. Cemal Ekin, Ph.D., has filed a class-action lawsuit against Amazon.com over its Prime Shipping program. Ekin paid $79 for Amazon Prime annual membership in order to receive free shipping on Prime-eligible goods, but alleges that Amazon induces sellers who participate in its Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA) program to mark up prices of Prime-eligible items to include shipping charges.

Should workers leaving Amazon.com's warehouses be paid for the time they stand in line to go through security pat downs? The Supreme Court will rule on whether a lawsuit to decide the matter can proceed, granting a petition for writ of certiorari on Monday in Integrity Staffing Solutions v. Busk, which deals with a "claim for overtime pay by workers for the after-hours screening as a measure to prevent workplace theft." The Seattle Times said workers sued in 2010 to receive pay for the time they wait in security screening lines before and after they start their shifts.

When you think of corporate espionage and snooping, you probably think of big manufacturers — electronics, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, packaged food — trying to learn what the competition is working on. One industry that's unlikely to come to mind is retail sporting goods. However, a lawsuit recently filed by the folks at Dick's Sporting Goods accuses Mitchell Modell, CEO of Modell's Sporting Goods, of posing as a Dick's vice president to gain access to the company's secrets. Modell allegedly presented himself a senior vice president to employees at a Dick's store in Princeton, N.J., on Feb. 8.