Pretty much anywhere you look these days is a website that allows you to review a product or service. In most cases, consumers write honest reviews. If you were happy with the product or service, you explain why. If you were dissatisfied, you explain why to warn others. However, what happens when you write a truthful review and it is a negative review for the company? Should the company be able to sue you? Wouldn't this be considered free speech?

To get around the idea of free speech, a lot of companies put non-disparagement clauses in their terms of use. You know all of those terms you are asked to review and click a box that you accept before you can use the website? This clause is contained within those terms. This clause will typically say that you agree not to post a comment on a social media site about the product or service or even limit what you can and can't post on a site. The problem is that you do not know you are agreeing to this because, quite honestly, who reads the terms.

Congress is trying to fix this by introducing a bill that would allow the Federal Trade Commission and States to take legal action against the companies that have these non-disparagement clauses in their contracts. California has taken the lead by enacting a law to ban these clauses. However, it will not take effect until next year. Hopefully, other states will follow suit.

The Supreme Court returns next week for its 2014-2015 term. One of the topics on the agenda this term concerns a woman claiming discrimination while pregnant. The woman, Peggy Young, worked for UPS. Typically, her job required her to be able to lift up to 70 lbs. However, since she was pregnant, she was advised not to lift over 20 lbs. She provided UPS with a note from a medical professional asking to be put on light duty. However, her request was denied. Interestingly enough, if Peggy needed light duty because she, say broke her arm, she would have been put on light duty.

A Federal Appeals Court sided with UPS finding that if UPS allowed Peggy light duty, it would provide pregnant employees with an advantage. As you can imagine, this opinion has created a lot of debate and hatred towards the panel.

More and more indoor trampoline parks are popping up all over as the fun continues to catch on. However, who is looking out for the safety of those using the trampolines? In Phoenix, a 30 year old man died after he was jumping on a trampoline at one of these trampoline parks. He was attempting a somersault into a shallow foam pit. However, the pit was only 2 feet, 8 inches deep. He broke 5 discs in his neck and that was all it took. A day of fun turned tragic without warning.

The mother of this poor victim now wants to make sure that others don't make the same mistake. Currently, there are no federal standards for indoor trampoline parks. Some states have steps up in the federal regulation absence, but it is not enough since these parks are in most states.

Another mom reported that her 6 year old daughter was jumping when an older boy landed  on her, causing her leg to break in two places.

If you choose to go to these indoor parks, make sure that the facility is not very crowded. Certain times of day bring more customers and more chances that you are going to bounce into another person. Also, make sure you really evaluate what is going on at the indoor facility. Is your child going to bounce off into a shallow pond like the first guy? Whether your child is 6 or 30, it is still your child and you will do everything in your power to protect him/her.

If you live in New Jersey, you know that the auto insurance rates are rather high. However, how does NJ compare to other cities and states in the country? A new list shows that Detroit actually has the highest insurance premium rates in the entire country. Those living in Detroit and insure a vehicle typically pay 165% more than the national average car insurance rate. That's insane? You are probably wondering what in the world someone in Detroit pays given the amount you know you pay each month. New York and Miami are next on the list for the second and third most expensive city. 

The cheapest city to insure a car goes to Charlotte, NC where you pay about 43% LESS than the national average. Where do the cities in NJ rank? Camden is actually in the top 25. 

Top 25 most expensive cities to insure a car are:

1. Detroit-Warren-Ann Arbor, Mich., 165%
2. New York-Newark, N.Y.- N.J.-Conn.-Pa., 36%
3. Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Port St. Lucie, Fla., 34%
4. Los Angeles-Long Beach, Calif., 25%
5. Atlanta-Athens-Clarke County-Sandy Springs, Ga., 17%
6. Sacramento-Roseville, Calif., 16%
7. San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, Calif., 10%
8. Philadelphia-Reading-Camden, Pa.-N.J.-Del.-Md., 10%
9. Houston-The Woodlands, Texas, 10%
10. Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, Fla., 9%
11. San Diego-Carlsbad, Calif., 2%
12. Boston-Worcester-Providence, Ma.-R.I.-N.H.-Conn., 2%
13. Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas-Okla., 1%
14. Portland-Vancouver-Salem, Ore., -1%
15. Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn.-Wis., -5%
16. District of Columbia-Baltimore-Arlington, Md.-Va.-W.V.-Pa., -6%
17. Seattle-Tacoma, Wash., -10 %
18. Orlando-Deltona-Daytona Beach, Fla., -10%
19. Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, Ariz., -10%
20. Denver-Aurora, Colo., -12 %
21. Chicago-Naperville, Ill.-Ind.-Wis., -16%
22. St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, Mo.-Ill., -18%
23. Pittsburgh-New Castle-Weirton, Pa.-Ohio-W.V., -24%
24. Cleveland-Akron-Canton, Ohio, -31%
25. Charlotte-Concord, N.C.-S.C., -43%

An Ohio Appeals court recently ruled that reaching for a glovebox during a traffic stop is not suspicious. In this case, defendant nearly struck an unmarked police car, causing her to be pulled over. While this was happening, the police in the vehicle noticed that defendant appeared to be reaching for her glovebox. After searching the vehicle, the police found a gun in the glovebox and arrested the defendant, even though she had a permit for the weapon. The matter went to the appeals court to determine the issue of reaching for the glovebox. The court determined that while the traffic stop was permissible since defendant admitted she was speeding, the reaching for the glovebox by itself did not give the police grounds to search the vehicle.

Last August, a 19 month old child died after swallowing 7 small magnetic balls from a necklace. Her brother brought home the necklace from school. The necklace broke and the little girl managed to swallow the actual magnets on the necklace. Not knowing what was happening, the mother found the little girl unresponsive with blood coming from her nose and mouth. The girl was rushed to the hospital and told she most likely had a virus. The next day the child died. Wanting to know what really happened, an autopsy was performed and it was discovered that the magnets attached to one another and perforated the child's bowel, causing the child to become septic.

Regulators are now trying to ban these high powered magnets made popular by the product Buckyballs, which were recalled in July.

This is the first known child to die as a result of this product. However, about 7,700 children ended up in the emergency room last year as a result of ingesting the magnets.