NY’s New False Advertising Amendment Puts Businesses at Risk

On January 20, 2026, NYS plugged a real problem with false advertising throughout the State by amending General Business Law § 350-a, by A4575, to add new subsection (2), which now provides:

Any written or electronic communication which simulates a document authorized, issued or approved by any court, official, agency of this state or a political subdivision thereof, or of another state or official governmental entity, foreign or domestic, or which creates a false impression as to such document's source, authorization or approval, shall be considered false advertising unless the person, firm, corporation or association, or agent or employee thereof, has received express permission from such court, official, or agency for the use of such document. This subdivision shall be construed to prohibit any false representation or implication, written or verbal, that a person, firm, corporation or association, or agent or employee thereof, selling a commodity or service is vouched for, approved of, bonded by, operating with or on behalf of, or otherwise affiliated with this state or a political subdivision thereof, or of another state or official governmental entity, foreign or domestic, unless such person, firm, corporation or association, or agent or employee thereof, has received express permission from such state or political subdivision for such affiliation.

Businesses are now on notice to stop stating or implying that they have anything to do with being approved by government, unless they receive permission to do so. If you've ever gotten something about obtaining your deed for your house to avoid deed theft, you know exactly what this is all about. So often citizens are manipulated by companies who appear official when they are not. Under the statute, any person injured by such false advertising may bring an action to enjoin the unlawful act or practice and recover damages. Specifically, the statute (GBL § 350-d) provides for recovery of actual damages or $5,000, whichever is greater. Additionally, courts have discretion to increase the award of damages to an amount not exceeding three times the actual damages, up to $15,000, if the defendant is found to have willfully or knowingly violated the statute. Reasonable attorney's fees may also be awarded to a prevailing plaintiff. To make matters worse for businesses who falsely advertise, class actions for actual damages under GBL § 350-a are permissible, provided the plaintiffs waive claims for minimum or punitive damages. 

Businesses better audit their advertising today.  Facing a false-advertising class action? Get a defense team that actually knows GBL § 350-a. Contact Lieb at Law.

*attorney advertising

Can a CEO Fire You for Cheating? The Legal Issues Behind the Natalie Dawson Story

Is Cardone Ventures Discriminating by This Post and These Actions?

American CEO Natalie Dawson, president of Cardone Ventures, has sparked debate after revealing she fired two employees for cheating on their partners. Speaking on The Diary of a CEO podcast, Dawson explained that she immediately terminated the employees upon learning about the infidelity, believing that personal dishonesty reflects professional unreliability.

For her, integrity in personal and professional life is intertwined, and she considers cheating employees a liability to the company culture and environment. While some support her commitment to ethics, others criticize her for blurring private and work boundaries.

#NatalieDawson #CEO #Integrity #WorkplaceEthics #Leadership #Infidelity #USNews #CorporateCulture #Accountability #BreakingNews #fblifestyle 

It really depends on the facts, but if you were terminated, you should take a deep look into this one.

Specifically, how did the CEO learn about the infidelity? Was it from an out-of-wedlock pregnancy? If yes, that can constitute sexual harassment under Title VII because only a woman can get pregnant.

Here is another angle: Is this CEO acting on religious grounds and trying to impose her beliefs on her staff? If so, that may constitute religious discrimination. A federal court explained earlier this year:

“The plaintiff must assert that an adverse employment action was taken because of a discriminatory motive based upon the employee’s failure to hold or follow her employer’s religious beliefs.”

— Owens v. City of New York Dep't of Educ., No. 21-2875, 2022 WL 17844279, at *2 (2d Cir. Dec. 22, 2022))." Maas v JTM Provisions Co., Inc., 1:23-CV-00076-JPH, 2025 WL 823671, at *4 [SD Ohio Mar. 13, 2025]

Think your firing crossed a legal line?

Lieb at Law handles discrimination and wrongful termination cases across NY, NJ, and CT.
Talk to an attorney today.

Contact Us

*attorney advertising

Federal Court Finds Religious Discrimination in Old Westbury Zoning Code

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (EDNY), in Lubavitch of Old Westbury, Inc. and Rabbi Aaron Konikov v. Incorporated Village of Old Westbury, New York delivered a strong reminder to municipalities: zoning codes cannot discriminate against religious institutions. 

The long running dispute centered on the "adoption of a land use statute aimed at places of worship". In striking down the law, EDNY emphasized that "[o]fficial action 'burdening religious conduct that is not both neutral and generally applicable, however, is subject to strict scrutiny,'" which is violated where "they treat any comparable secular activity more favorably than religious exercise." Here, the Court found exactly that - a violation. 

Seventeen years of litigation later, the question remains: why wasn’t the Chabad simply allowed to build its house of worship? From a reading of this case, it’s hard to see why the Village of Old Westbury has fought so long rather than just letting them build it.

If your religious organization is facing discriminatory land use restrictions, attorneys at Lieb at Law, P.C. can help evaluate your case. 

*attorney advertising. 

NYC School Bias Case Dismissed — The Court Demands Specific Proof of Causation

NYS' highest Court, the Court of Appeals, ruled in IntegrateNYC, Inc. v. State of New York that claims that NYC Public Schools discriminate by their "admissions and screening policies, curriculum content, and lack of diversity among the teacher workforce... fail as a matter of law." However, the real takeaway was that even, under a "liberal standard applied on a motion to dismiss" where facts are presumed true, a Plaintiff cannot make conclusions of causation without allegations of fact in a discrimination lawsuit. Simply, Plaintiffs need to get granular to win and if defending, a defendant would be well served to point out that it's all conclusory when dismissal is sought. 

This case was brought under the Education Article and the Equal Protection of Law of the NYS Constitution and the NYS Human Rights Law [Executive Law 296(4)]. For each claim, the Court reminds us of the requirements as follows:

• "A claim brought under the Education Article... [requires] 'first, that the State fails to provide [plaintiffs] a sound basic education in that it provides deficient inputs—teaching, facilities and instrumentalities of learning—which lead to deficient outputs such as test results and graduation rates'...[s]econd, plaintiffs must sufficiently allege causation—that the deficient outputs are “causally connected” to the claimed input deficiencies... [where] the deficiencies complained of must represent a 'district-wide failure'... [and it] requires allegations of a “gross and glaring inadequacy” in the quality of education being provided."
• "To state an Equal Protection claim based on disproportionate impact of a facially neutral action or policy, a plaintiff must show '[p]roof of racially discriminatory intent or purpose'."
• Under the NYSHRL, it is "an unlawful discriminatory practice for an educational institution to deny the use of its facilities to any person otherwise qualified, or to permit the harassment of any student or applicant, by reason of his race . . ."

In making its decision, the Court pointed out that it is undecided whether "disparate educational outcomes alone could in some circumstances sustain such a claim." But, more importantly, the Court made a stark observation that should be noted by all Plaintiffs and Defendants in discrimination cases - a complaint fails where it does not include specifics. A complaint will be dismissed where it relies on "plaintiffs' conclusory allegations, such as here, where Plaintiff just plead 'but for the discriminatory admissions testing,' Black and Latino students 'would not have been excluded'." The Court needed more and without it, the case was dismissed. 

Think you have a discrimination case? Use our Discrimination Case Checker to see if your claim meets the legal standards set by New York’s highest court.

*Attorney Advertising

Employee Resource Groups are Discriminatory per DOJ - Here Comes Reverse Discrimination Claims

The US Justice Department Released its Guidance for Recipients of Federal Funding Regarding Unlawful Discrimination. Yet, the real takeaway is not about funding at all. Instead, the key is that Employee Resource Groups are discriminatory. Specifically, the Guidance reads that an initiative that "designates a 'safe space' or lounge exclusively for... a specific racial or ethnic group" is an example of unlawful practices. In that vein, DOJ recommends that "[a]ll worplace programs, activities, and resources should be open to all qualified individuals, regardless of race, sex, or other protected characteristics. Avoid organizing groups or sessions that exclude participants based on protected traits. Some sex separation is necessary where biological differences implicate privacy, safety, or athletic opportunity." If you were excluded from such a program, activity, or resource based on your sex or race, or any other protected characteristic, you may now have a claim for discrimination according to DOJ. 

If you were excluded from a workplace group or denied access to an employee program based on your sex, race, or another protected characteristic, contact Lieb at Law, P.C. to discuss your potential discrimination claim. Our attorneys handle complex workplace discrimination cases across New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut.

*attorney advertising. 

NYS' Highest Court Addresses a Good Guy Guaranty Conditioned on Tenant's Surrender

Does a surrender require acceptance for it be effective in landlord / tenant law? Well, that really depends on the lease as we recently learned from NYS' highest court, the Court of Appeals. Before the Court was a good guy guaranty being litigated. "[A] 'good guy' guaranty is a limited guaranty in which the guarantor’s obligation extends only up to the point that the tenant surrenders the premises to the landlord, leaving the tenant solely responsible for rent due from that point forward" according to the Court in 1995 CAM LLC v. West Side Advisors, LLC, et al. This is a huge reminder because in commercial real estate litigation, tenants are often dumbfounded to learn that the good guy guaranty does not excuse the tenant from liability, just the guarantor. Regardless, the case before the highest court was far more nuanced and involved another real issue that frequently arises in commercial real estate litigation - the interplay of a tenant vacating a tenancy and a landlord accepting a surrender. Stated otherwise, the Court needed to determine whether the guarantor's "liability ends with [tenant's] surrender of possession, or with [landlord's] acceptance of surrender." In deciding this issue, and while being mindful that the contractual language at issue could change the result, the Court found that the landlord's acceptance of surrender was irrelevant to the issue because acceptance would result in the landlord never accepting and the lease running its course and therefore, the good guy language of the lease would be superfluous. Therefore, the Court reminded us that "[i]mportantly, an interpretation that renders language in the guaranty superfluous is “a view unsupportable under standard principles of contract interpretation” (Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection of State of N.Y. v Bank Leumi Tr. Co. of New York, 94 NY2d 398, 404 [2000]).

Litigation over a lease or guaranty?
Lieb at Law’s litigation team represents landlords in high-stakes real estate disputes across New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. Contact us to build your case.

*attorney advertising 

Rent Check Bounced? A New NY Law Just Capped What Landlords Can Charge You

Ever bounced a rent check and been hit with a random “returned payment” fee that felt way higher than it should be? A new law in New York just put a stop to that.

As of October 16, 2025, New York landlords can no longer charge tenants excessive fees when a rent check bounces. This new law, passed as Assembly Bill A56, makes it clear that landlords can only charge tenants for the actual cost they incur when a check is dishonored.

That means no more flat “penalty” fees or inflated charges that go beyond what the bank actually billed the landlord. And here’s the kicker: landlords can only charge this fee if it’s specifically written into the lease. If it’s not in the lease, they can’t demand it later.

What do you think, does this law strike the right balance between protecting tenants and covering landlords’ real costs? 

#StopTheIck

Reddit Story: My Boss Lifted My Skirt to “Check Dress Code” — This Is Why We Say #STOPTHEICK

“He said my outfit was ‘too suggestive’ but that it would be fine to wear if I was his personal assistant. Then he stood up, lifted my skirt, and put his hand down my underwear. He said, ‘if I can do this, it’s breaking dress code.’”

— Reddit user, r/TwoXChromosomes

A young woman posted this after starting her first job as a front-desk receptionist. Her boss made “offhand jokes,” calling her eye candy and saying front-desk work was “a woman’s job.” She brushed it off. Most of us do because we’re told to be professional, not make it weird, and keep our heads down.

But this story shows what happens when the ick goes unchecked. What started as comments escalated into assault.

It Starts With the Ick

That uncomfortable feeling in your gut when someone in power jokes about your body or clothes? That’s not oversensitivity. That’s your instincts warning you. That’s the ick.

When workplaces ignore it when people say “he didn’t mean it like that” the behavior festers until someone gets hurt.

Here’s the Truth

What this boss did is not a “misunderstanding.” It’s sexual assault and workplace discrimination. 

Yet, that's not even the point - the point is you can't give an inch when you get the ick. Even if the statements weren't severe and pervasive enough or even if they were just petty slights or trivial inconveniences, too many people focus on whose right? Instead, you need to focus on #STOPTHEICK before you even get to whether there is a hostile environment case because an unchecked hostile environment often turns into sexual assault. 

Just so you know, you are protected under both federal law and state laws across the tri-state area that make this conduct illegal:

• ⚖️ Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Federal): Applies to nearly all U.S. workplaces.
• ⚖️ New York State & New York City Human Rights Laws: Prohibit any unwelcome sexual conduct, even one incident.
• ⚖️ New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD): Protects employees from harassment, retaliation, and hostile work environments.
• ⚖️ Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act (CFEPA): Bans sexual harassment and protects anyone who reports it.

These laws make sexual harassment and assault illegal in every workplace. They protect employees from unwanted sexual contact, comments, advances, and any retaliation for reporting misconduct.

You don’t have to scream or fight back for it to count. Freezing is a trauma response, not consent.

Retaliation is illegal. You cannot legally be fired, demoted, or punished for speaking up.

You have legal options:

• 📄 File a complaint with HR, the EEOC, or your state or city human-rights agency.
• 🧑‍⚖️ Bring a lawsuit against an employer or coworker who violated your rights.
• 💼 Negotiate severance or settlement through an employment attorney.
• 🔐 Keep everything confidential, you decide how and when to share your story.

If this happened to you, you are protected under federal law and your state’s law and you are not alone.

Why We Say #STOPTHEICK

“Jokes,” “compliments,” and “dress-code talks” like this aren’t harmless they’re warning signs of cultures that excuse abuse. More so, that boss was testing you to see what he could get away with and thought it was okay to put his hand down your pants. Every ignored ick is an open door for someone to cross another and further line.

Calling it out isn’t overreacting. It’s prevention. It’s how we keep workplaces safe, equal, and human.

If You’ve Experienced This

You are not alone. You are not to blame. And you have rights.

Get confidential help at www.stoptheick.com or contact Lieb at Law, P.C. at (646) 216-8009.

Know Your Rights Call for Help

#StopTheIck #WorkplaceHarassment #SexualHarassmentAwareness #YouAreNotAlone #EndWorkplaceAbuse

This post is part of our #StopTheIck series. We highlight real stories shared online about workplace harassment, discrimination, and abuse and break down the rights and protections that exist under the law. Have a link you want us to cover? Submit it here.

*attorney advertising

Sexual Favors as a Condition of Tenancy Violate Fair Housing Act and New York State Human Rights Law

Instagram has a post that reads - "Sex for Rent Agreements Becoming Increasingly Popular in Canada" and its got a lot of likes and traction. 

Not sure what's happening north of the border, but in the US, that "agreement" clearly violates the Fair Housing Act and state laws, like the New York State Human Rights Law. Simply, a landlord, who is in a position of power cannot condition a tenancy, rental payments, or services (like maintenance) relevant thereto on receiving sexual favors or sexually charged pictures, or, even sexual talk. To be certain, a tenant can go so far as having sex or providing sexual favors to their landlord and still sue their landlord for discrimination by arguing that the tenant's act of participating in sexual acts doesn't change those acts into being welcomed (a key word in discrimination law); that power differential just won't go away when quid pro quo discrimination happens (i.e., trading a sexual favor for a positive term of the tenancy). If you are not yet convinced, check out landlord Edwin Allen who was reported to be ordered by a jury to pay his tenant $10,000,000* for increasing her rent and threatening to evict her to pressure her for sex. This is actionable discrimination. The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice even has its own Sexual Harassment in Housing Initiative - Be warned. 

* That doesn't make all cases worth this amount or anything at all, but it certainly paints a risk assessment. 

If you’ve experienced or been accused of sexual harassment in housing, contact Lieb at Law, P.C. Our discrimination attorneys handle cases across New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut.
👉 Speak with a Housing Discrimination Attorney

*attorney advertising

FMLA Just Got Messy: DOL Redefines “Normal Workweek” for Shift Workers

Employees with irregular or extended schedules (like correctional officers, nurses, EMTs, and other shift-based workers) have a new way to calculate Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) entitlements per a DOL Opinion Letter, FMLA2025-02-A (Sept. 30, 2025). In summary, under the Opinion Letter, FMLA hours are based on the actual “normal workweek,” not a standardized 40-hour figure, where mandatory overtime now counts, but voluntary overtime does not. As a result, an employee’s 12 weeks of FMLA leave must reflect that employee’s schedule, not a default 40-hour standard. For example, a correctional officer working 84 hours every two weeks (12-hour shifts, mandatory overtime included) is entitled to 504 hours of FMLA leave, not 480. Employers must also deduct leave on that same basis: hours actually missed from the normally scheduled workweek. To put it simply, if an employee skips required overtime because of FMLA leave, those hours count against their entitlement. But if they skip voluntary overtime, it doesn’t.

Simply, under the Opinion Letter, DOL drew a fuzzy (and litigable) line between “mandatory” and “voluntary.” These types of fuzzy lines result in litigation where an employee will claim that they were ‘pressured’ to pick up shifts or 'strongly suggested’ to take extra hours. Rather than clarifying the rules, the DOL has created a new battleground for disputes over scheduling language and payroll records. Employers are now left to prove, retroactively, that a shift was truly voluntary. Employers with shift differentials, rotating schedules, or recurring overtime must audit how they calculate FMLA entitlement and usage. HR systems that default to a 40-hour week are officially outdated. The DOL has made it clear that if your FMLA math doesn’t match your reality, you’re violating federal law.

The bottom line is that employers, especially in public safety and healthcare, need to redefine their policies before the lawsuits hit. Audit your “mandatory” overtime definitions, verify your FMLA tracking system, and get your documentation airtight. Because after this Opinion Letter, one miscounted hour could mean an FMLA interference claim.

Don’t wait for an FMLA lawsuit to expose your timekeeping gaps.

📞 Contact Lieb at Law, P.C. to audit your overtime policies, HR systems, and FMLA compliance before enforcement begins. Call Lieb at Law, P.C. 646-216-8009. 

*attorney advertising