Blog / Legal News and Product Recalls

If You Are Going to Steal, Try to Steal at Least a Billion Dollars

CHRIS_REGAN.jpg
In the midst of the recent government shutdown, a story emerged that a group of people receiving welfare through the "EBT" program unexpectedly found that their EBT debit cards suddenly had no limit. The computer glitch allowed these individuals, who are dependent on food stamps to live, to go to Wal-Mart and fill up carts full of groceries to take home. A commentator, titling his article "The Louisiana Heist" described the scene this way: There was no food left on any of the shelves, and no meat left. The grocery part of Walmart was totally decimated." One man even managed to spend $700. This was certainly a windfall for these individuals, as food stamps ordinarily provide just a modest allowance of $100.00-200.00 dollars per month per person, and are available only to Americans with incomes below $20,000.00 for a family of four. The author of one editorial angrily demanded the arrest and prosecution of these scoundrels with their full grocery carts, saying: "This was theft, pure and simple, and its perpetrators should be treated as any other thief would be." Many news outlets presented this situation as an incident worthy of national attention and anger. The New York Daily News, more than a thousand miles away, called it "chaos." Another outlet called it an "outrage." The editorialist quoted above called it a "serious moral issue." And our society agrees. Welfare fraud is prosecuted aggressively in the United States, often resulting in prison sentences and fines in the tens of thousands of dollars for perpetrators. To take one example, an impoverished woman who qualified for the benefits because of her low income, but failed to disclose prior drug charges, earned a three-year prison sentence for receiving food stamps unlawfully. An unfortunate woman with two disabled children who had an on-and-off father received a felony conviction and prison time for claiming extra money. Another man received a one year sentence based on his failure to disclose that his wife lived with him. Even if the perpetrators of the Wal-Mart EBT shopping spree are able to avoid lengthy prison sentences, they doubtless face fines for the value of what they received, a criminal record and the loss of benefits and concomitant difficulty surviving. Those who called for their prosecution are sure to get their wish, in other words. Of course, there are other "outrages" in the United States these days. For example, a few years ago, through gross mismanagement and stunning avarice, the corporate leadership of a dozen or so large banks nearly destroyed the United ebt glitch.jpg States economy. Lehman Brothers, although certainly not the only offender, was among the worst. Some of the top bankers were drawing salaries in the tens of millions of dollars while they lead their banks into bankruptcies and bailouts. The bankruptcies in turn led other banks to the verge of collapse or collapse itself and taxpayers were compelled to bail these institutions out with billions and even trillions of dollars. As a PBS investigation soberly put it: "According to a team at Bloomberg News, at one point last year the U.S. had lent, spent or guaranteed as much as $12.8 trillion to rescue the economy." Thinking back to the poor fellow with the $700.00, grocery-laden carts at Wal-Mart, these bankers cost us enough to pull that "Louisiana Heist" eighteen billion times. In other words, these bankers took enough cash off the U.S. taxpayer to buy a truckload of groceries for every human being on earth and enough more to do it over and over again. Mortgage lenders, likewise earning hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars, entered into fraudulent loans by violating well-established laws and responsible practices in order to line their pockets with money that working people had earned and entrusted with them when they realized their loan products were "toxic assets." They sold them off to unsuspecting pension groups and various government agencies, infesting the modest retirement accounts of our nation's working people and elderly with worthless securities. One of the worst malefactors was Goldman Sachs who deliberately led their own clients to purchase assets they knew to be worthless so that they could make even larger profits betting the other side of the market to enrich themselves. These people are responsible, not only for the theft of the billions and trillions of dollars they paid themselves to do this to the United States of America, but also for five years of recession and sluggish economic growth, including the most massive unemployment the United States has seen since the 1930s. The total loss to the people of the United States of America as a result of these actions of perhaps a few hundred, or at the most a thousand elite bankers, hedge fund managers, and their accomplices in the Treasury Department, is many trillions of dollars. In contrast to the "EBT shopping spree" perpetrators, the people who stole billions and trillions from America are not going to jail. Few if any of them have been criminally prosecuted, and likely no more of them ever will be. Moreover, only one or two of them have been made to give back any of the money they stole from coal miners, fireman, police officers, secretaries, school teachers, waitresses, and every other American who has suffered as a result of their astonishing greed. Fines have been a few millions of dollars, a tiny fraction of what was taken. But that's not all. Not only have these individuals escaped any criminal prosecution, and not only have they been allowed to keep all the money they stole, they've all kept their jobs or been shuffled around to different ones in substantially the same positions. And they are all doing it again. That's right. The same people who led the entire economy to its biggest defeat in a century are still in command. It's as though General Custer was promoted after leading his troops to the massacre at Little Big Horn. And if you think they might be doing a better job this time because they've learned their lesson, watch out. They've learned their lesson, but it's not the lesson you think they've learned. money2.jpg They haven't learned to avoid taking spectacular risks with other people's money. They got paid for that. They haven't learned to stop defrauding their customers and investors and regular Americans because they got paid for that too, and they haven't learned that their actions which brought the economy to the brink of utter disaster need to be avoided at all costs in the future. They got paid for that, and paid well. The last few weeks, while the government was shut down, regular people suffered, veterans lost benefits, children with diseases lost chances to get treatment, medical research was delayed. That didn't stop the shutdown. When the debt limit deadline was approaching, rich Wall Street bankers felt threatened. And they got what they wanted, unlimited access to taxpayer money to fund their lifestyles. What this cadre of corporate criminals have learned, first and foremost, is that their wealth, and their influence in our political system allows them to get away with anything. That's the lesson we taught them. But those poor food stamp recipients with their "six to eight carts full of groceries," that's a real outrage - that's a "serious moral issue." Let's get right on top of those poor people walking out the front door with food to eat, while we ignore the bankers walking out the back door with all the money in the world. Meanwhile, in Ohio, the government is prosecuting a woman with mental health issues who took $2.87 from a fountain that people throw coins into. The prison taxpayers will pay to keep her locked up has been privatized. Thousands more of your dollars shipped to Wall Street over the moral issue of this woman taking three coins from the fountain. The moral: If you steal, be sure to steal at least a billion dollars.    
Posted in:

Related Posts

Hospital sign pointing to the Emergency Room and Main Entrance outside a medical building

$3.77 Million in Medical Malpractice Case Against Wheeling Doctor and PA

WHEELING, WV / PITTSBURGH, PA — An Ohio County, West Virginia jury has returned a $3.77 Million verdict in a medical malpractice case against a doctor and a physician’s assistant at WVU Medicine Wheeling Hospital. Following a four-day trial, the jury found both Dr. Barry Mitchell and Physician’s Assistant Michelle Porembka negligent in their medical care of 64 year old Julie Daley when she presented with abdominal complaints at the Wheeling Hospital emergency room in June 2022. As a result of the medical care providers’ failure to timely and properly treat her condition, Daley ultimately sustained a perforated colon along with necrosis which ultimately lead to her needing to have a permanent colostomy. The jury found that the conduct of both Mitchell and Poermbka fell below the standard of care for medical care providers in their field and that their negligence proximately caused injuries and damages to Mrs. Daley.  Daley was represented at trial by Geoff Brown and Tyler Smith of the Wheeling law firm of Bordas & Bordas. Following the verdict, Smith commented, “We are pleased that the jury recognized that this should not have happened to Julie Daley and that they compensated her for the life-long effects that she will have as a result of the negligence of the medical providers.” Mark Robinson and David Givens of Flaherty, Sensabaugh, and Bonasso represented the medical providers at trial.  Circuit Court Judge Jason Cuomo presided over the case. Brown stated “Our practice is based upon fighting for justice for people who have been injured or wronged by others.  Helping others is at the root of everything that we do and we are glad that we were able to help Julie and her family obtain a measure of justice through this case and this result.” About Bordas & Bordas Founded in 1985, Bordas & Bordas Attorneys PLLC has earned a reputation as one of the region’s premier personal injury and plaintiff litigation law firms. With offices in Wheeling and Moundsville, West Virginia; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and St. Clairsville, Ohio, the firm represents clients in cases involving automobile and trucking accidents, medical malpractice, workplace injuries, nursing home negligence, product liability, wrongful death, insurance bad faith, and more. The firm operates on a contingency fee basis (clients pay only if there is a recovery) and offers free initial consultations. Rooted in its core values of experience, family, community, and results, Bordas & Bordas continues to stand as a trusted advocate for individuals and families across the Ohio Valley and beyond. Visit www.bordaslaw.com for more information.

The Pennsylvania Superior Court Analyzes the Federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act in Denying Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings

The Pennsylvania Superior Court Analyzes the Federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act in Denying Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings

The Pennsylvania Superior Court Analyzes the Federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act in Denying Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings In Boyle v. Meyer, 2025 PA Super 198 (September 9, 2025), the Pennsylvania Superior Court denied a physical therapy company’s motion for judgment on the pleadings based on the immunity provisions contained in the federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act). Background of the Case Plaintiff Boyle required physical therapy following open-heart surgery. To minimize the risk of contracting COVID-19, he arranged for OSPTA Home Care to provide in-home services. On November 8, 2020, physical therapist Meyer arrived without gloves, a face shield, or a proper mask — only wearing a thin, disposable surgical mask. Meyer also shook Boyle’s hand without gloves, did not wash her hands before treatment, and performed therapy as usual. Days later, OSPTA informed Boyle that Meyer had tested positive for COVID-19. Boyle soon developed symptoms, was hospitalized for ten days, and continued to suffer complications five months later. Boyle sued OSPTA and Meyer, alleging: Meyer was negligent in failing to wear proper personal protective equipment (PPE). Meyer exposed him to unreasonable risk and performed therapy despite known exposure. OSPTA failed to properly train and supervise Meyer and implement safeguards to prevent the virus’s spread. Defendants’ Motion and PREP Act Defense In response, Defendants admitted Meyer was not wearing gloves or a face shield but stated she wore a surgical mask and used hand sanitizer earlier in the day. They argued they were immune from liability under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 247d-6d, 247d-6e. Defendants asserted that they met all four requirements for immunity: Public health emergency – The COVID-19 pandemic triggered PREP Act protections. Covered persons – They qualified as both “program planners” and “qualified persons” under the Act. Covered countermeasure – Meyer’s “thin, disposable surgical mask” was a device authorized for emergency use by the FDA. Causal relationship – Meyer’s use of the mask had a causal connection to Boyle’s COVID-19 claim. The trial court denied their motion for judgment on the pleadings. Superior Court’s Analysis On appeal, the Superior Court found several factual disputes that prevented judgment for the Defendants. Specifically: It was unclear whether Meyer’s surgical mask qualified as a “covered countermeasure.” The pleadings did not conclusively establish that the Defendants were “covered persons.” Even if both were true, PREP Act immunity applies only to the use or administration of a covered countermeasure — not to its non-use. Citing Hampton v. California, 83 F.4th 754 (9th Cir. 2023), the Court noted that the PREP Act shields defendants from claims related to administering a covered measure, but not from claims alleging failure to administer one. Because Boyle’s complaint focused on the failure to use proper PPE, inadequate screening, and lack of training, his claims fell outside the scope of federal immunity. Conclusion The Superior Court concluded that the PREP Act did not preempt Boyle’s state-law negligence claims, affirming the trial court’s denial of the motion for judgment on the pleadings. The full opinion in Boyle v. Meyer, 2025 PA Super 198 (September 9, 2025), is available on the Pennsylvania Judiciary website. To learn more about legal issues surrounding immunity and negligence in Pennsylvania courts, visit our post on how the PA Superior Court reviews evidentiary challenges in medical cases.

Lead Risk Prompts Nationwide Recall of Ground Cinnamon

Lead Risk Prompts Nationwide Recall of Ground Cinnamon

Lead Risk Prompts Nationwide Recall of Ground Cinnamon The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a nationwide recall of 12 ground cinnamon brands after testing revealed elevated levels of lead. Roughly 21,690 units were sold through retailers like Dollar Tree and Save-A-Lot before being pulled from shelves. Consumers are urged to immediately throw away any affected products and avoid purchasing them until further notice. See the official FDA recall notice. Why This Recall Matters Although no injuries have been reported yet, the FDA warns that prolonged consumption of contaminated cinnamon can cause lead accumulation in the body. Children are especially at risk, since lead exposure can impact neurological development. Cinnamon is often used in foods like cereals, baked goods, and snack mixes — staples in many households with kids. This makes the recall a major public health concern for families nationwide, including those in West Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. FDA’s Broader Effort This recall is part of a larger FDA initiative to monitor imported spices more closely. Several cinnamon brands have been flagged in prior alerts, and surveillance is ongoing. For example: The FDA recently added Asli brand ground cinnamon to the list of affected products after new testing revealed unsafe lead levels. Additional products may be named as investigations continue. See the expanded FDA alert. What You Should Do If you purchased ground cinnamon recently: Check your spice cabinet against the recall list. Dispose of any recalled products immediately. Do not repurchase affected brands until the FDA clears them. If you suspect your child or another family member has been exposed, consult a healthcare provider for guidance. For ongoing updates, visit the FDA’s cinnamon recall page. Protecting Consumers This recall is a reminder that product safety issues extend beyond toys, appliances, and vehicles — even everyday food staples can carry risks. Families in WV, OH, and PA should stay informed about recalls and understand their rights if a defective or dangerous product causes harm. At Bordas & Bordas, our attorneys help consumers hold corporations accountable when safety takes a backseat to profit.