Spilling the Deceitful Tea: Navigating the Flavor Versus Ingredient Debate Amidst Kominis v. Starbucks Corporation

Introduction

by Madeline A. Earles

Louisiana’s incredibly rich and diverse culture is often reflected through the unique cuisine throughout the state. Of Louisiana’s varying customs and traditions, a world-renowned gift remains at the heart of Louisiana cooking—Cajun cuisine. The ever-growing popularity of Cajun cuisine coupled with modern advancements in the culinary sphere has led to the use of Cajun seasoning without making a trip down the bayou to Cajun country. A multitude of brands sell the ill-defined, premade Cajun seasoning in a jar, each adding its own unique spin on the ingredients.[1] With each brand providing its own spin on the seasoning, one cannot truly define what Cajun seasoning is or distinctively list a specific ingredient flavor present in the product. The differing ingredients of these brands along with a lack of consensus on flavor allow Cajun seasoning brands—who are responsible for the formulation, manufacturing, marketing, naming, advertising, and sale of its products—great freedom in the distribution of such products. However, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York’s rejection to dismiss reasonable consumer claims potentially affects this freedom where the flavor versus ingredient debate is set to continue.[2] Continue reading

An Unconventional Obligation: The Marriage Contract in Louisiana After Wederstrandt v. Kol

by Elise I. Diebold

Introduction
Just two weeks after a car accident claimed the life of their daughter, Ivie Efferson’s parents filed a petition to annul their deceased daughter’s marriage under Louisiana Civil Code article 2030.[1] Article 2030 provides a general rule of conventional obligations which states that “[a] contract is absolutely null when it violates a rule of public order, as when the object of a contract is illicit or immoral.”[2] However, in Wederstrandt v. Kol, the Louisiana Supreme Court determined that article 2030 does not apply to the contract of marriage.[3] Instead, marriage contracts are classified as absolute nullities only under the exclusive grounds enumerated in Louisiana Civil Code article 94.[4] Thus, article 2030 may not be used as a basis for annulling marriages.[5] However, this decision raises the implication that marriages may in fact be entered into for the purpose of violating a rule of public order, provided that all other requirements to perfect a valid marriage contract are met.[6] Continue reading

Gauthreaux v. City of Gretna: Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal Finding No Protection Against Sexual Orientation Discrimination in Employment

by Jake Lee

Introduction
Louisiana’s state law protections against discrimination in employment have recently expanded but are still not fully protective. In 2022, Louisiana became the 18th state to implement the CROWN Act—legislation prohibiting employers from discriminating against an employee based on his or her natural hairstyle.[1] After the implementation of the CROWN Act, the Louisiana Employment Discrimination Law (the LEDL) now prohibits discrimination based on an “individual’s race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or natural, protective, or cultural hairstyle.”[2] However, despite these expanded protections, the LEDL does not protect against employment discrimination based on a person’s sexual orientation.[3]

Continue reading

HB 142’s Age Verification Requirements for Accessing Porn Online Raise Privacy Concerns

by Hailey Cummiskey

Introduction
Louisiana residents need not be tech-savvy to be familiar with LA Wallet, a fairly new application for both Apple iOS and Android that is now a lawful form of identification in the form of a digital driver’s license. The app’s origins can be traced to 2016, when Louisiana State Representative Ted James introduced House Bill 481, which the Louisiana legislature passed with Act 625, making Louisiana the first state to offer a legal, digital driver’s license.[1] Developed in 2018 primarily by the Louisiana Office of Technology Services and the Office of Motor Vehicles in partnership with Envoc, the LA Wallet app is a convenience to citizens and law enforcement alike, with over 1.4 million active users to date— nearly a quarter of Louisiana’s total population.[2] Gone are the days of not being able to walk into a bar because of the common slip up of leaving a wallet at home or losing a purse. So long as the patrons have their phone on their person, vendors can simply use LA Wallet’s “real-time age verification” instead of turning them away for forgetting to bring their license.[3] Further, the Louisiana State Police accept LA Wallet as valid proof of licensure, saving Louisiana drivers from having to scramble around their cars for an ID.[4] Recent expansions of LA Wallet’s reach, however, raise some concern about the safety of personal information contained in the app, particularly within the realm of online pornography.

Continue reading

The Elite 8%: Cautioning Against The Constitutionalization of Favoritisim for New Orleans

By Luke A. Dupré

Introduction

Louisiana’s rich colonial history has impressed its mark upon all societal institutions within the far reaches of the state’s boundary lines. From the story of the Acadian journey from Nova Scotia to the times of early French and Spanish possession, the early history of Louisiana has shaped one institution in particular—the law.[1] One of those early impressions which the state cannot seem to function without is a deference to the City of New Orleans in all aspects of law and governance.[2] The special treatment of New Orleans is a recurring theme which can be found throughout all sources of Louisiana law.[3] The most troubling form of that extraordinary treatment is the constitutional amendment—an instrument which alters the sacrosanct language of the state’s governing document.

On November 8, 2022, voters arrived at the polls to cast their ballots and were confronted with a proposed constitutional amendment which essentially would have imposed a cap on the increase of assessed value of residential property in Orleans Parish.[4] The reason for the proposal was simple: proponents believed that the assessed values in Orleans Parish were rising too fast.[5] Indeed, recent times have brought about surges in property values to many regions of the state.[6] Underlying these two simple assertions about rising property values is a simple polarity: Orleans Parish, which seeks to alter the playing field for itself, and those other sixty-three parishes which feel comfortable working under the legal construction binding upon all others within Louisiana. This Blog Post argues that the constitutional exemptions, exceptions, and privileges given to Orleans Parish should be cautioned against and perhaps cast aside at the next constitutional convention.

Continue reading