This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
You may have heard about Squishmallow’s recent lawsuit against Build-a-Bear over plushy knockoffs. I previously blogged about one such case, where Squishmallow sued 90 e-commerce merchants in a sealed complaint and got a TRO. The judge subsequently held the marketplaces in contempt for violating the injunction.
After a couple of defendants showed up, the judge denied a TRO extension because of the possible lack of merit in the plaintiff’s infringement allegations. 5 at 4 (“[A]ddresses provided on the e-commerce stores indicate that the registrants are in China and other neighboring countries.”). Then, the case fell apart. See ECF No.
Public access to court data through automated collection of online court records is a fundamental First Amendment right and it is critical to meaningful access to the United States legal system. District Court Judge Henry E. The recent ruling in South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP v. While the developments in NAACP v.
Two top-line takeaways you might get from this post: A two-click formation process avoids the risk of judges moving the goalposts about formation, and If you are amending your TOS, have an airtight plan for building a credible evidentiary record. And I guess pink is overly distracting to this judge? HELLO UETA and E-SIGN.
The court-appointed the SBA as a receiver and permitted it to marshal Cardinal’s assets and business records. Much of the costs were charges from an e-discovery vendor to collect and search electronically stored information (ESI) , including e-mails relating to Cardinal. The court denied the reimbursement request.
The City of New York, 50 unnamed NYPD officers, and the former NYPD Commissioner are involved in a civil rights lawsuit over allegedly issuing summonses without probable cause, violating the First, Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Judge Robert Sweet granted the Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions.
From all the entries we received, a panel of judges narrowed down the applications. Note: The ballot was supposed to list 25 companies, but because of a tie in the initial round of voting by judges, 26 companies are listed.). In December, we issued a call for entries. Now your votes will select the final 15. FIND THE BALLOT HERE. .
million antitrust lawsuit against the North Carolina State Bar, alleging the bar unreasonably barred LegalZoom from offering a prepaid legal services plan in the state. To our surprise, then-Court of Appeals Judge Richard Dietz voiced his support for regulatory reform.
From all the entries we received, a panel of judges narrowed down the applications. Note: The ballot was supposed to list 25 companies, but because of a tie in the initial round of voting by judges, 26 companies are listed.). In December, we issued a call for entries. Now your votes will select the final 15. FIND THE BALLOT HERE. .
The entire purpose of the discovery rule is to allow a plaintiff to recover damages that occurred more than three years before the date the lawsuit was filed. That company recorded and released one album and several singles, including the works at issue. Two years later, in Starz Entertainment v. 4th 1236 (9th Cir. 4th 1325 (11th Cir.
For nearly 30 years, the framework for judging fair use cases has been remarkably stable, based on Justice Souter’s masterful opinion for a unanimous Court in Campbell v. There is no evidence in the record that Warhol was aware of the single-use restriction in the license. Oracle software case. (See Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. ,
Superior Court judge Brian Holeman sided with news organizations, allowing the release of the deposition video from a $10 million lawsuit filed by Trump against chef Geoffrey Zakarian, who had signed a lease to run a restaurant in Trump's hotel in the Old Post Office Pavilion on Pennsylvania Avenue NW, near the White House.
E-discovery professionals are on the front lines of detecting deep fakes used as evidence, according to Marathe. Marathe argues judges and lawyers also need to be heavily educated on the latest developments in deep fake technology in order to counter their use in court. Are Judges, Juries and Lawyers Ready?
E-discovery professionals are on the front lines of detecting deep fakes used as evidence, according to Marathe. Marathe argues judges and lawyers also need to be heavily educated on the latest developments in deep fake technology in order to counter their use in court. Are Judges, Juries and Lawyers Ready?
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content