He was, and is, the owner of Kiyomura Corporation, which runs the Sushi Zanmai chain across Japan. In Tokyo he is known as the Tuna King, because every January he buys the most expensive fish at the first auction of the year at the central market.

I haven't travelled that often, but reading has helped me to do that.

In 2001, Dr. Richard Batista, a Long Island surgeon, donated one of his kidneys to his wife, Dawnell Batista, to help save her life. Four years later, when she filed for divorce, the case took an extraordinary turn.

During the divorce proceedings in 2009, Dr. Batista countersued and asked for either the return of the kidney or $1.5 million in financial compensation.

The request was rejected by the Nassau County Supreme Court. Under U.S. law, including the National Organ Transplant Act, human organs cannot legally be bought, sold or treated as financial assets or marital property.

The court treated the kidney donation as a voluntary and unconditional gift. Once the kidney was transplanted, it became part of the recipient’s body, and the donor no longer had ownership rights over it.

Medical experts and bioethicists also raised serious ethical concerns about the idea of removing a functioning transplanted kidney without medical need. Such a procedure could put the recipient’s health at risk and goes against the medical principle of “do no harm.”

The unusual kidney donation divorce case became widely known because it brought together questions about love, marriage, organ donation, medical ethics and the law.

It remains a striking example of how an organ donation is treated as a permanent gift rather than something that can later be reclaimed.

A Taiwanese man's attempt to catch his cheating wife backfired in a way he likely never saw coming, winning him a payout in one courtroom and a prison sentence in another.

According to a Taoyuan District Court ruling released August 18, the man, whose identity was not disclosed, married his wife in 2021. The couple lived mostly with his parents but occasionally stayed at a vacation home the family owned in Guishan, Taoyuan.

In September 2023, his suspicions were triggered after he found a used toothbrush at the vacation home that wasn't his. After reviewing parking garage footage, he identified an unfamiliar man who had previously driven his wife home.

Three months later, on December 24, 2023, he remotely activated the home's robot vacuum through its app, telling the court he originally meant to use its speaker to talk to his wife. Instead, the live camera showed another man inside the house with her. He switched on the recording function and kept watching, capturing footage of his wife embracing the man, changing clothes, and appearing naked in front of him.

He used that footage to sue his wife and the other man for NT$2 million, about $63,000, for violating his marital rights. A civil court agreed the relationship had exceeded ordinary friendship and ordered the pair to jointly pay him NT$500,000, roughly $16,000.

That victory didn't shield him from what came next. His wife filed a criminal complaint accusing him of recording her without consent. He argued the footage had already been accepted in the civil case and that his actions were legally justified.

The criminal court disagreed. Judges ruled that marital obligations do not override an individual's right to privacy, rejecting his claim that lights or sounds from the vacuum warned her she was being recorded. The court found the recording was deliberate and she never consented, including while naked.

He was sentenced to five months in prison and fined NT$150,000, about $4,700, roughly 30 percent of what he'd just won.