Rival Calif. Papers Settle Lawsuit Over Ad Pricing

Recent Cases

Two San Francisco newspapers engaged in a lengthy legal battle over predatory pricing have settled their dispute outside of court.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the Bay Guardian and SF Weekly announced a settlement Monday but did not disclose its terms.

The Guardian filed an antitrust lawsuit against SF Weekly in 2004, accusing the paper of slashing advertising prices to drive the Guardian out of business. A San Francisco judge in 2008 ordered SF Weekly to pay $21 million to its rival.

SF Weekly has said its low-cost ads reflected fair competition and did not violate antitrust laws.

Both alternative weeklies are distributed for free and rely on ad revenue to continue operating.

Related listings

  • Court backs Uniloc in case against Microsoft

    Court backs Uniloc in case against Microsoft

    Recent Cases 01/06/2011

    A federal appeals court reinstated a 2009 jury verdict Tuesday that Microsoft Corp. infringed on patents held by software maker Uniloc Inc., reversing a judge's decision to the contrary, but it also granted Microsoft a new trial on damages.The U.S. C...

  • Judge strikes down NYC's gruesome tobacco ads

    Judge strikes down NYC's gruesome tobacco ads

    Recent Cases 01/05/2011

    The city's campaign to scare smokers with grotesque images of decaying teeth or a diseased lung wherever tobacco products are sold was struck down Wednesday by a federal judge who concluded that only the federal government can dictate warnings that m...

  • Iowa Supreme Court upholds taxation of KFC

    Iowa Supreme Court upholds taxation of KFC

    Recent Cases 01/04/2011

    The Iowa Supreme Court has upheld a decision to levy corporate income taxes against fried chicken giant KFC.At question is whether the state can impose income tax on revenue received by a company that doesn't have a presence in Iowa. KFC doesn't own ...

Does a car or truck accident count as a work injury?

If an employee is injured in a car crash while on the job, they are eligible to receive workers’ compensation benefits. “On the job” injuries are not limited to accidents and injuries that happen inside the workplace, they may also include injuries suffered away from an employee’s place of work while performing a job-related task, such as making a delivery or traveling to a client meeting.

Regular commutes to and from work don’t usually count. If you get into an accident on your way in on a regular workday, it’s probably not considered a work injury for the purposes of workers’ compensation.

If you drive around as part of your job, an injury on the road or loading/unloading accident is likely a work injury. If you don’t typically drive around for work but are required to drive for the benefit of your employer, that would be a work injury in many cases. If you are out of town for work, pretty much any driving would count as work related. For traveling employees, any accidents or injuries that happen on a work trip, even while not technically working, can be considered a work injury. The reason is because you wouldn’t be in that town in the first place, had you not been on a work trip.

Workers’ compensation claims for truck drivers, traveling employees and work-related injuries that occur away from the job site can be challenging and complex. At Krol, Bongiorno & Given, we understand that many families depend on the income of an injured worker, and we are proud of our record protecting the injured and disabled. We have handled well over 30,000 claims for injured workers throughout the state of Illinois.

Business News