Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Sun-Sentinel: What happens when parents go beyond sharenting?
So many parents routinely share photos and news about their kids on social media that the behavior has a name: sharenting. Usually harmless and well-meaning, it can also take a dangerous turn, exposing children to online predators, allowing companies to collect personal information and creating pathways for children to become victimized by identity theft. The risks are most pervasive when parents overshare to profit from their social media accounts. Whenever parents share, they are the gatekeepers, tasked with protecting their children’s information, but they are also the ones unlatching the gates. When parents profit from opening the gates, it is especially challenging to balance protecting their kids’ privacy against sharing their stories. Federal and state laws typically give wide deference to parents to raise their children as they see fit. But the state can and does intervene when parents abuse their children. Those laws protect children in the physical world. However, few laws shield children when parents risk harming them online. Let’s consider this hypothetical situation based on a composite of real-life events. Mia (fictional name) is a 7-year-old girl growing up in Orlando. Her mother is a stay-at-home parent who has a public Instagram account and considers herself an influencer. Many lingerie brands pay Mia’s mom to model their clothing. When a lingerie company from overseas offers Mia’s mom some money to have Mia also pose in their clothing, Mia’s mom says yes. Over the next few weeks, Mia and her mom model the clothing together in pictures and videos, sometimes wearing the outfits while reading together in bed, having pillow fights or being playful around the house — always in clearly intimate but arguably appropriate settings. Mia’s mom’s social media page explodes with new followers, many of whom appear to be grown men. The images on the page receive hundreds of likes and multiple comments. Mia’s mom deletes the most inappropriate comments but leaves others, hoping to increase engagement. As Mia’s mom’s social media following grows, so does the amount of money she earns. Mia tells her teacher about the social media page. Her teacher reaches out to Mia’s parents, to no avail. Mia’s mom keeps sharing. The teacher sees this as a potential form of abuse and neglect and, according to her obligation as a mandatory reporter of abuse, she calls in a report to the state’s central abuse registry. The teacher isn’t trying to get Mia’s mom in criminal trouble, but she thinks the family could use some education surrounding safe social media use and possibly access to financial support if they need this type of online exposure to pay the bills. The intake counselor declines to accept the hotline call. The counselor explains that the posting of pictures is not grounds for an abuse, abandonment or neglect investigation. The parent is sharenting, the counselor says, and that is within a parent’s right. Of course, child sexual abuse material is illegal, but the photos posted by Mia’s mom fall into a gray area — not illegal material, but likely harmful to Mia. Should there be a law to stop this? I believe there should be. Just as our views regarding child abuse have evolved, so must our views on sharenting. Merely 150 years ago, it was legal for parents to beat their children. It wasn’t until 1874, when a little girl named Mary Ellen was beaten severely by her caregiver, that courts began to step in. Drawing from existing laws prohibiting animal cruelty, the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals argued that Mary Ellen had the right to be free from abuse. At the time, there were laws protecting animals from harm by their caregivers but no laws protecting children from such harm! Back to the present: Mia’s disclosure to her teacher could have changed her life and led to her family getting online safety help, if only the child welfare laws were suitably tailored to protect her in the online world as they attempt to do offline. Child protection laws should be expanded to include harms that can be caused by online sharing. The law can both protect parental autonomy and honor children’s privacy through a comprehensive and multidisciplinary new approach toward protecting children online — one that allows for thoughtful investigation, education, remediation and prosecution of parents who use social media in ways that are significantly harmful to their children. This conduct, which falls beyond sharenting, is ripe for legal interventions that reset the balance between a parent’s right to share and a child’s right to online privacy and safety. Stacey Steinberg grew up in West Palm Beach and now lives in Gainesville, where she is a professor at the University of Florida Levin College of Law; the supervising attorney for the Gator TeamChild Juvenile Law Clinic; the director of the Center on Children and Families; and the author of “Beyond Sharenting,” forthcoming in the Southern California Law Review. This piece was also published in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel.
WSJ Quotes Sample on Presidential Term Limits
Hofstra Law Professor James Sample was quoted in the Wall Street Journal article “Trump Told by Alan Dershowitz Constitutionality of Third Term Is Unclear.” In the piece, Prof. Sample, a constitutional law scholar, discussed one scenario raised by former President Donald Trump’s allies involving the presidential line of succession and whether it could be used to test the limits of the 22nd Amendment.
UC Irvine’s Daniele Piomelli provides expert view on federal reclassification of cannabis
As the White House moves to reclassify cannabis under federal law from a schedule I to a schedule III, questions remain about how the change could affect medical use, public health, research, and regulation. UC Irvine’s Daniele Piomelli, PhD, an internationally recognized cannabis researcher, is available to comment on the implications of the policy shift. Piomelli is a distinguished professor of anatomy and neurobiology at the University of California, Irvine, the Louise Turner Arnold Chair in the neurosciences, and director of the UCI Center for the Study of Cannabis. Piomelli has more than 30 years of experience studying cannabis, THC and the endocannabinoid system, with research spanning basic neuroscience, pharmacology and translational science. He is editor in chief of Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research and has testified before the U.S. Senate on cannabis-related research and policy. He can provide perspective on: • What federal reclassification may change for medical cannabis and scientific research • Differences between THC, CBD and other cannabinoids • Potential public health benefits and risks of cannabis legalization • Cannabis exposure and the developing brain, including adolescence • Regulatory and research challenges tied to cannabis policy Piomelli is available for interviews or background conversations. Email: piomelli@hs.uci.edu
New book from Aston University academic shows that Christmas tasks mostly fall on women
New book by Dr Emily Christopher shows differences in how household tasks are divided by men and women Book highlights that women tend to buy the Christmas presents and send cards Men often see women as being more thoughtful or having better knowledge of what people would like. A new book from Aston University’s Dr Emily Christopher reveals that when it comes to sending Christmas cards and buying Christmas presents, women are still mostly doing the work as they are perceived to have better knowledge of what people would like. Dr Emily Christopher, a lecturer in sociology and policy at Aston School of Law and Social Sciences, has recently published her book Couples at Work: Negotiating Paid Employment, Housework and Childcare, which look at how household tasks are divided by men and women and the reasons behind these divisions. The data for the book has been collated over an eight-year period with couples being interviewed twice to provide a robust set of results. It looks at how different sex parent couples combined paid work, housework and childcare. The research revealed how gender norms continue to shape how certain daily household jobs are divided. Women were more likely than men to clean the house, especially bathrooms, wash clothes and put clothes away. Men still tend to do tasks like mowing the lawn and DIY but now are also more likely to do the cooking and the grocery shopping. The research shows that the key to understanding how household tasks are divided lies in the meaning they hold for partners. With the festive season upon us, the book reveals that woman are largely responsible for the Christmas present buying and sending cards with 100% of those taking part in the research saying that women mostly carried out these tasks. This also included buying for the male partner's relatives. In instances where men had a 'helping' role in these tasks, this included being involved in the discussion or consulting on choice of presents, especially for children, with only a small minority buying presents for their own family. The data revealed that where women didn't choose and buy presents for their partners family, they were still involved in reminding their partners that this needed to be done or advising on choice of gifts, showing that women were still taking on the mental load of planning for the festive season. The book reveals that when men were questioned about why they didn't get involved in present buying, they drew on gender norms. Women were often described, by the men, as being more thoughtful or having better knowledge of what people would like. Men often described how family members wouldn’t receive presents at all if it relied on them. Although much of the gift giving and organising represented love and affection for the women, which many found enjoyable, many still saw it as work and expressed that they would like their partners' to be more involved. Dr Christopher said: “This book takes an in-depth look at the way in which everyday roles around the household are divided between men and women. “The research shows that over a period of eight years fathers increased their role in childcare tasks but this did not always extend to housework. “The pandemic was an opportunity to change how couples share housework but women were still more likely to carry out tasks like cleaning, washing clothes and putting clothes away and overwhelmingly remained responsible for the mental orchestration of family work.”
As holiday shopping season nears, UF experts warn retail theft is growing more sophisticated
With the busiest shopping season of the year approaching, new findings from the National Retail Federation’s Impact of Retail Theft and Violence 2025 report — developed by the University of Florida’s SaferPlaces Lab and the Loss Prevention Research Council — show retailers are facing increasingly complex and technology-driven threats. UF researchers say early preparation, better data and stronger collaboration will be essential as stores brace for heavier foot traffic and heightened safety risks. Despite public reports that retail theft is decreasing, Read Hayes, Ph.D., a UF research scientist and director of the LPRC at UF Innovate, said retailer surveys tell a different story: Incidents of shoplifting, organized retail crime, online fraud and other external theft continue to rise, even as some law enforcement statistics appear flat or declining. The gap, he said, reflects how much crime goes unreported or unrecorded. “Retailers have always had a difficult time reporting much of their crime, and if you look only at police data, like calls for service or arrests, it can look like retail crime is flat or even slightly down,” he said. “But when we survey retailers, who are the actual crime victims, they consistently report year-over-year increases in theft and violence.” Criminal groups are also becoming more sophisticated. Hayes said offenders are increasingly using technology to defeat protective systems, disrupt cameras and identify vulnerable stores. They also rely heavily on social media platforms such as TikTok and Reddit to coordinate attacks and share tactics. “It’s a little disconcerting how much criminals rely on social media now to scout stores, map out easy targets, learn from each other or just plain brag about how they did it,” he said. LPRC scientists monitor social media signals to help retailers and law enforcement understand emerging threats — not in real time, Hayes said, but to help build best practices organizations can use to defend themselves. Criminals continue to focus on high-demand items such as branded apparel and footwear, prompting retailers to rethink how those products are displayed and secured. Hayes said many companies are testing new approaches to better protect vulnerable merchandise without driving customers away. One example is automated self-service systems for locked items, where customers can retrieve a product by having a code sent to their phone without waiting for a store employee. Safety remains retailers’ top concern, Hayes said. LPRC’s latest report, developed in collaboration with the security technology company Verkada, found that frontline retail workers report feeling less safe than ever, a trend that typically intensifies during the holiday rush. Rising incidents of in-store violence, limited law enforcement support in some areas and increased guest-related confrontations are pushing retailers to reassess how they protect both employees and customers. “Nothing is more important than protecting the frontline retail associates who keep this industry running,” Hayes said. “This report helps reinforce what retailers need to do to ensure those workers feel safe.” LPRC teams are also studying ways to improve safety beyond store walls, testing parking lot technologies, including license plate readers and flashing deterrent systems designed to discourage potential offenders and reassure law-abiding shoppers. At the federal level, Hayes said he and partners across the country are urging Congress to pass a bill to address organized retail crime and establish a centralized platform for reporting retail theft threats. As the holiday season approaches, Hayes said the need for evidence-based solutions has never been clearer. “Retailers are under pressure to keep their stores safe, welcoming and competitive,” Hayes said. “The more we can understand offender behavior, customer expectations and emerging technologies, the better we can help retailers, communities and law enforcement reduce harm.” The LPRC, headquartered at UF Innovate, brings together more than 200 major retailers, technology companies and public safety agencies to conduct research that strengthens store safety, reduces loss and enhances the customer experience.
A Roadmap or a Rift? Examining Trump’s 28-Point Ukraine Peace Proposal
As negotiations around the war in Ukraine continue to dominate global headlines, a newly surfaced 28-point peace proposal associated with former U.S. President Donald Trump has triggered intense debate across NATO capitals, Kyiv, and Moscow. The document — described in reporting by Reuters, Axios, Sky News, Al Jazeera and other outlets — outlines a framework aimed at ending the conflict but includes provisions that many analysts say could significantly reshape Europe’s security landscape. A Plan Built Around Ceasefire, Guarantees, and Reconstruction At its core, the plan calls for a formal ceasefire, a non-aggression pact between Russia, Ukraine, and European states, and a set of “security guarantees” meant to deter future conflict. Reporting indicates that Ukraine would receive assurances that any renewed Russian offensive would trigger a coordinated international response. The plan also proposes the creation of a major reconstruction program — potentially financed in part with frozen Russian assets — to rebuild infrastructure and modernize Ukraine’s economy. The proposal references pathways for deeper Ukrainian integration with Europe, including support for progressing toward EU membership and providing enhanced access to European markets. A large “Ukraine Development Fund” is also mentioned in multiple summaries of the plan. Provisions Driving the Most Global Pushback The most controversial elements relate to Ukraine’s territorial integrity and long-term security posture. Outlets such as Sky News and Al Jazeera report that the draft would recognize Russian control over Crimea and large parts of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson — areas currently occupied by Russian forces. Ukraine would also be required to formally abandon NATO membership and cap its military at 600,000 personnel. Additional provisions include restrictions on the presence of foreign troops in Ukraine, phased lifting of sanctions on Russia, full amnesty for war-related actions, and the reintegration of Russia into global economic and political structures. These components have drawn sharp responses, particularly from European leaders who argue the plan could reward aggression and undermine international legal norms. Dr. Glen Duerr is a citizen of three countries. He was born in the United Kingdom, moved to Canada as a teenager, and then to the United States to obtain his Ph.D. His teaching and research interests include nationalism and secession, comparative politics, international relations theory, sports and politics, and Christianity and politics. View his profile. What Remains Unclear or Still Under Discussion Reporting from Reuters and AP notes that many sections of the plan remain undefined or are still in flux. The exact mechanism behind the proposed security guarantees is not detailed. Oversight of reconstruction funds, timelines for reintegration of Russia, and the legal handling of frozen assets also require further clarification. Some reporting suggests parts of the plan draw from a prior informal Russian “non-paper,” raising questions about the provenance and intent of specific provisions. Why the Proposal Matters With the war approaching four years of fighting, any formal proposal for ending hostilities carries significant geopolitical weight. Supporters of the plan frame it as a pragmatic attempt to halt loss of life and begin rebuilding. Critics argue it risks legitimizing territorial conquest and weakening the broader post-Cold-War security order. As governments evaluate the implications, journalists covering defense, diplomacy, and international law will find this evolving proposal central to understanding where U.S., European, Russian, and Ukrainian negotiators may — or may not — be willing to go next.
Trump’s Threat is His Destruction of the Republican Party
In All the King’s Men, Robert Penn Warren describes Willie Stark’s final victory. “And there wasn’t any Democratic party. There was just Willie, with his hair in his eyes and his shirt sticking to his stomach with sweat. And he had a meat ax in his hand and was screaming for blood.” Warren’s description is darkly poetic and metaphorical. Stark, the populist governor of a fictional state, did not murder his rivals, but he did destroy them, along with the political party he rode to power. Like Stark, Donald Trump has carved up the Republican Party of old, and in its place, there is just Trump. This is not the first time a politician has remade a political party, but the death of the G.O.P. threatens to unbalance our political system. We are defined by close elections, tight legislative majorities, and polarized preferences. Neither side in the cultural conflict can achieve core objectives, so the temptation to put more hope and power into the Executive, to skew the system, is mounting. We can argue about the degree to which past Republicans were truly restrained, especially in government spending, but at least the G.O.P. used to advocate for two seatbelts to keep the body politic safe from accidents: character to govern the self and constitutionalism to limit what government can do to others. As the G.O.P. grew to rival Democratic power, in the 1980s and 1990s, the New Deal coalition fractured, along with the assumption that simply more power, expertly applied, could solve our problems. Democrat Bill Clinton conceded “the era of big government is over.” Justice Elena Kagan recognized, “we’re all textualists now.” The tug of war between an evolving progressivism and a robust conservatism may not have made for an ideal way to solve problems, but it did encourage humility, born of the recognition that radical actions, even if successful, would be punished. Dr. Mark Caleb Smith serves as Professor of Political Science and the Director of the Center for Political Studies at Cedarville University. He teaches courses in American Politics, Constitutional Law, and Research Methodology/Data Analysis. His primary research interest is in the field of religion and American politics. View his profile Those days are over. Donald Trump’s Republicans are no longer a restraint of any kind. The seatbelts of the past have been snipped by the same leaders who claimed to buckle them in place. The Epstein Files are the exception of congressional pushback that proves the rule of the party’s degradation. But what of the appointment of unqualified and incompetent leaders in the F.B.I., H.H.S., Homeland Security, and the Department of Defense? Illegal and extra-judicial killings in the Caribbean? An unexplained and unauthorized military buildup in the same region? Shakedowns of universities and media outlets? Crypto corruption? Tariffs? Strong-arming law firms and firing career civil servants for seeking justice in our courts? The Republican response has mostly been crickets. There is no longer a major party that pretends to restrain the president through the law out of principle. The real disagreement between Trump Republicans and Biden Democrats is not about should the president abuse his power, but how. Unless something dramatic happens, the politics of the meat ax will come for us all. Mark is available to speak with the media regarding the state of politics in America. Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview.
A popular on-the-go sandwich is now the subject of a mega trademark lawsuit between two food industry giants. The J.M. Smucker Company, more commonly known as Smucker's, recently filed a trademark lawsuit against grocery chain Trader Joe's over what it alleges is infringement upon its iconic billion-dollar investment: the Uncrustables sandwich. Smucker's seeks to obtain unspecified monetary damages from Trader Joe's, as well as profit from its similar product. But beyond the novelty of the sandwich suit lies a complex case built around a lesser-known morsel of trademark law, says Waseem Moorad, Esq., assistant professor of Law at Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law and director of the school's Intellectual Property Clinic. Professor Moorad, a former U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent (USPTO) examiner, recently discussed the actual claims of the lawsuit, and how both parties are preparing for a potential trial. Q: Since this lawsuit was filed, it has been a popular topic of public discourse, much of which has centered on the product—a crustless peanut butter and jelly sandwich—itself. Is that what this is truly about? Professor Moorad: Much of the commentary has been focused on the argument of whether Smucker's is permitted to have a monopoly of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, or if Trader Joe's can actually infringe upon the Uncrustables product without necessarily using the actual trademarked name. While both discussions are legitimate conversations folks could have while munching on the delicious snack products, they are not necessarily the relevant legal claims at the crux of this lawsuit. Q: Before we get into what those relevant legal claims are, Smucker's has filed dozens of trademarks in its 128-year history. What sorts of intellectual property do these trademarks generally protect? PM: Most of their trademarks filed with the USPTO are registered to protect against competitors from using words, logos, slogans, symbols and other materials that are linked to the brand name of the company, its affiliates, or its respective products. Well-known examples include Smucker's, Folgers, Jif and, of course, Uncrustables. If a competing company has a brand or a product that has a similar sounding name or appearance, such as "Giff Peanut Butter," then Smucker's could sue that company for trademark infringement. That name is not only infringing upon a trademark that Smucker's has federal protection over, but also is in the same related industry (food products), within which Smucker's has protection. Q: But Trader Joe's did not necessarily infringe on any trademarked words, symbols, slogans or the like. What, then, is the basis for the claims of infringement? PM: The issue is related to a deeper subset of trademark law, specifically the concept of "trade dress." Trade dress is the intellectual property associated with the visual and aesthetic characteristics of a product or its related packaging that allows a consumer to know with whom that product or packaging is associated. For example, Coca-Cola's name, which is federally protected, is well known as a registered trademark; however, the Coca-Cola bottle, with the curvy appearance where it gets slimmer in the middle, is an example of a registered trade dress belonging to Coca-Cola. If there was no logo or word mark on the bottle, the average consumer would still be able to recognize it as a Coke bottle. There are several trademarks that Smucker's owns that are related to the trade dress of its products. Smucker's isn't alleging that Trader Joe's is copying any of the branding names of their products; they are accusing their competitor of mimicking the trade dress or aesthetic appearances, textures and characteristics of its Uncrustables products and packaging. Q: What specific trade dress trademarks are they claiming have been infringed upon? PM: There are at least two registered trademarks that Smucker's is drawing legal attention to. In 2002, Smucker's had trademarked the image of an Uncrustables sandwich that has pie-crimping indentations or marks along the circumference of the sandwich, and in 2019, the company trademarked the image of an Uncrustables sandwich with a bite taken out of it. Smucker's argument is that the Trader Joe's packaging for a similar crustless peanut butter and jelly shows an image of a sandwich with a bite taken out of it, as well as the crimping along the outer edges. Q: How does one make a legal case out of something like this? PM: In order to effectively file a trademark infringement lawsuit, the plaintiff must not only show that their federally-protected intellectual property rights are being infringed upon, but also demonstrate that as a result of this infringement, the customer or consumer is being confused. Smucker's alleges that as result of Trader Joe's actions, customers are now confused over the product and are purchasing Trader Joe's peanut butter and jelly sandwiches thinking they are actually Smucker's Uncrustables sandwiches. Smucker's is of the belief that if the Trader Joe's packaging did not show pie-like crimped edges and the image of the sandwich with a bite taken out of it, confused consumers would not have purchased the Trader Joe's products and would have instead purchased Smucker's Uncrustables. It is this argument that will be the crux of the court cases to follow. Q: Assuming this goes to trial, how will the two parties prepare and what are some of the challenges for Smucker's as plaintiff? PM: Part of the case on Smucker's end will be to gather customer feedback or testimony that demonstrates confusion in the marketplace as a result of the similar packaging and trade dress. Trader Joe's will focus on the fact that even though the packaging may be similar, there would be no reason or basis for a customer to be confused between a Trader Joe's-branded product and a Smucker's-branded product. As the plaintiff in this case, the burden shall be on Smucker's to prove the confusion element necessary to have trademark infringement. The Trader Joe's product clearly says Trader Joe's, and the chain has a marketplace reputation for selling its own products rather than other-branded products. The challenge in such a scenario will be to prove, despite this, that customers purchasing this product would still have gotten confused and either assumed that they were purchasing Uncrustables, or mistakenly believed that Uncrustables may now have a commercial relationship with Trader Joe's.
Detecting Fraud Using Emerging Technology: Innovating Beyond Traditional Controls
Fraud and financial crime are evolving at a pace that challenges even the most established detection systems. From cyber-enabled schemes and complex financial misappropriations to subtle internal manipulations, traditional audit and compliance methods are often too slow or too narrow to keep up. In a world where billions of data points can hide a single irregularity, the investigative advantage now lies in speed, intelligence, and technological adaptability. J.S. Held’s Ken Feinstein recently authored an article exploring how artificial intelligence, machine learning, and advanced data analytics tools are transforming how organizations uncover and prevent fraud. In his piece, “Detecting Fraud Using Emerging Technology: Don’t Be Afraid to Innovate,” Feinstein illustrates how the integration of digital investigation techniques — from automation to predictive analytics — is reshaping the fraud-detection landscape, helping companies not just react to wrongdoing but anticipate and deter it. Ken Feinstein specializes in investigative data analytics and has over 25 years of experience. He provides data analytics solutions spanning multiple sectors, including retail and consumer products, life sciences, technology, financial services, and industrial products. His clients include law firms and Fortune 500 legal and compliance teams for whom he delivers large-scale, complex investigations, regulatory response matters, proactive anti‐fraud efforts, and compliance programs. View his profile here Why This Matters As fraudsters exploit digital tools and globalized networks, detection efforts must evolve in kind. Regulators expect faster, data-driven investigations, and boards demand real-time risk visibility. Those who innovate with AI-enabled detection and forensic analytics are better positioned to protect assets, reputation, and shareholder trust. Looking to know more? Connect with Ken Feinstein today by clicking on his icon below.
Forensic Meteorology in Insurance: Bridging Weather Science, Claims, and Liability
When severe weather strikes, the insurance industry is not only contending with damage and loss, but also with the question: Did this storm event actually occur, and did it trigger the risk covered under policy terms? J.S. Held's forensic meteorologist Daniel Schreiber authored an article explaining how Certified Consulting Meteorologists substantiate (or refute) storm-event claims by reconstructing what the weather actually did at a loss location. In his article “Forensic Meteorology in Insurance: How Do Certified Consulting Meteorologists Help with Storm Damage Claims & Disputes?” Schreiber illustrates how the overlap of a valid insurance policy, a damaging event, and a verified storm forms the core of many disputed claims. Dan Schreiber is a Certified Consulting Meteorologist with over ten years of experience in military, aviation, and severe weather operations. Mr. Schreiber has provided consulting and expert services for both plaintiff and defense law firms and insurance adjusters, appraisers, umpires, and policyholders throughout North America. He has been consulted and/or retained as an expert in over 850 matters and has testified in both depositions and during trials in state and federal courts. View his profile here Why This Matters In an era of escalating extreme weather events and heightened exposure for insurers, the science of forensic meteorology — the application of certified weather expertise to claims investigation and litigation — is becoming indispensable. Professional meteorology, as it relates to insurance claims handling and the litigation process, is becoming increasingly recognized, and the employment of meteorologists within the insurance industry is growing. Schedule an interview with Daniel Schreiber to learn more about how forensic meteorologists can help with insurance claims and disputes by clicking on his icon below.
