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
A section of the Lawyers and the Legal Process Center in the Justia Legal Guides tries to make lawsuits and the court process more accessible to the average person. What Can You Ask a Court To Do? What you want the court to do is usually called a remedy. This is an order that tells the defendant to do or not do something.
The Foreclosure Law Center provided by Justia aims to illuminate what can be a complex process. In a judicial foreclosure , the lender seeks a judgment from a court to foreclose on the home. On the other hand, a non-judicial foreclosure allows a lender to foreclose on the property outside court.
The Workers’ Compensation Law Center at Justia provides insights on how the process unfolds. Even if a business labels a worker as an independent contractor, they still are considered an employee if they meet the definition of this term under state law. Ultimately, they might pursue an appeal in state court.
Your website plays a critical role in how potential clients discover, evaluate, and ultimately choose your law firm. This means your law firms website needs to be accessible to people with vision, hearing, mobility, and cognitive impairments. So, which level should your law firm aim for? Law firms are not exempt.
What our limited case law tells us In some cases, judges have displayed strong displeasure at a party trying to pass the buck by crying “deepfake” without basis. Khalilian , defense moved to exclude a voice recording ostensibly showing the defendant making threats on the grounds that it could be deepfaked. In Huang v.
The defendant, Kalita Mukul Creative, ran community-focused newsletters. The defendant published a bio on Sewell and included one of McDermott’s photos–apparently sourced from an unrelated Instagram account (possibly another infringer, or perhaps that account has a fair use defense?). Defendant’s financial benefit.
The flagship law in this area is the Consumer Review Fairness Act, enacted by Congress in 2016. My primer on that law. California enacted a similar law, Civil Code 1670.8, informally called the “Yelp Law” (as in, it protected consumers’ rights to post reviews on Yelp). the not-as-a-mark doctrine).
Pandabuy initially no-showed in the case, so the court converted the TRO to a preliminary injunction. Pandabuy eventually showed up in court and explained how it operates more like a passive facilitator than a seller or manufacturer. This additional context prompted the court to dissolve the injunction. SAD Scheme Cases Suck.
The Personal Injury Law Center provided by Justia outlines this area of the law. This means that a plaintiff will need to prove four main elements: a duty of care owed by the defendant to the plaintiff, a breach of that duty, causation , and damages. Here are some common questions to which it offers basic answers.
Toyota brought a SAD Scheme case against 103 defendants before Judge Daniel in the Northern District of Illinois. If these justifications sound familiar, it’s because these are the generic rotely-made defendant-unspecific allegations that are copied and pasted into most SAD Scheme complaints. .” Seriously, Toyota?
AI footnote fail triggers legal palmface in music copyright spat Thomas Claburn An attorney defending AI firm Anthropic in a copyright case brought by music publishers apologized to the court on Thursday for citation errors that slipped into a filing after using the biz’s own AI tool, Claude, to format references.
” (Plus, the court notes that while he’s in prison, his job prospects are limited). ” Doxing The relevant statute applies when a defendant intentionally published the plaintiff’s personally identifiable information without the consent of the person whose information is published.”
In other words, the plaintiffs are trying to use venerable legal doctrines to create a common-law notice-and-takedown scheme. The court dismisses the case entirely with leave to amend. Thus, to remedy the alleged defect, Defendants would have to change the content posted on their platforms. Strict Products Liability. Negligence.
Shopify said California courts lack personal jurisdiction over it. The district court agreed with Shopify, as did a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit. The en banc court issues a total of four opinions, and collectively they show Shopify was never close. Briskin sued Shopify for a variety of privacy violations in California.
District Court in Manhattan by a legal tech executive who alleges her former company owes her over $1 million in stock and that her former boss sexually harassed her. Defendants Sued Her First At the time I wrote that, I had not heard back from my request to the defendants for a response to Diaz-Roa’s allegations.
In my last post , I discussed how evolving technology will continue to influence our relationships and thus, impact family law. However, unlike phone calls, text messages leave a written record that can later be reviewed, and, in some cases, used as evidence in court. This is often the case in family law matters.
The Banking and Finance Law Center at Justia provides a detailed discussion of cryptocurrency and the legal concerns that it implicates. In addition, this section of the Justia Legal Guides covers a broad range of topics involving securities laws and banking regulations. These are often called “blue sky” laws.
On January 22, Booking.coms renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) was granted. The JMOL had two primary conclusions: First , that the CFAA has extraterritorial application, and therefore it was appropriate for this court to apply the CFAA here. But this court says, not so. Van Buren v. United States , 593 U.S.
US appeals court temporarily lifts block on Louisiana Ten Commandments law –jurist.org Aabshar Ghassi | U. Pittsburgh School of Law, US A US federal appeals court on Friday temporarily lifted a lower court’s blocking of a Louisiana law mandating public schools to display the Ten Commandments in every classroom.
The court disagrees but gives plaintiffs leave to amend. (As The court says these allegations aren’t good enough in light of Hamidi. First, the court says the mere placement of cookies, without more, doesn’t show any actual injury to the plaintiffs. The court cites Doe I v. Case Citation : Doe v.
In the lawsuit I’m covering today, Roblox named over 250 defendants. If that’s true with the other 18 cases, Roblox may have sued 4,000+ defendants using the SAD Scheme. Hierl was the lead counsel on the Emojico case I opined on in 2021.] * * * Jurisdiction The defendant Bigfinz sells t-shirts. Seriously, Roblox?
The TOS doesn’t impose such a duty: “nothing in the Terms promises or guarantees that Defendant will work with a user to restore access to an account at all, let alone on a specific timeline. The Terms only state that Defendant may take certain actions in response to harmful conduct or violating content.”
A web of federal and state laws shields consumers from fraud, abuse, and other forms of harm. The Consumer Protection Law Center at Justia offers both practical advice and legal information. State laws governing debt collection sometimes extend more broadly. States may have similar or broader laws.
In addition to educating the public and helping develop policies, the agency can bring legal actions against people or businesses that have allegedly violated consumer protection laws. The Consumer Protection Law Center at Justia provides more details about how the FTC helps protect consumers from deceptive and unfair business practices.
The court summarizes the case: Rodney Woodland, a freelance artist and model, posts semi-naked photographs of himself in different poses on Instagram. The court displayed all of the photos side-by-side, so of course we’re going to look at them. I guess that makes me old-school. So I think this is a SFW post.
The court (correctly) calls this implementation a “sign-in-wrap” (ugh), but still goes through the standard analysis to identify consumers’ manifestation of assent. The court hunts for evidence that consumers had actual knowledge of the terms, but comes up dry. The green one is only slightly easier to see.
While AI promises efficiency and cost savings, a recent case in the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of including unverified AI-generated content in court filings. The court discovered that eight of those cases did not exist. law to add supporting case law.
So where exactly is the Ninth Circuit’s law on this topic? The defendant claimed that the First Amendment barred the lawsuit “because the claims would interfere with Defendant’s First Amendment discretion to choose its own content moderation policy,” citing the O’Handley district court case.
Emojico has trademark registrations in the word “emoji” for a ridiculously broad range of product categories–from (I’m not making this up) ship hulls to penis enlargers–and it then licenses the word to product manufacturers and defendants ensnared in its enforcement net. One defendant fought back.
As exciting as generative AI can be, it raises certain questions involving copyright law. Federal statutes do not provide clear answers to these questions, so courts will need to confront them. Already, lawsuits involving AI-generated works have been filed in federal courts from coast to coast. However, the U.S.
Whether youre a law student attempting to master case briefing, or a lawyer seeking to re-learn this skill to advocate more effectively, this blog post provides a useful cheat sheet to make tackling case briefs more efficient. Unlike legal briefs , case briefs are not submitted to the court or opposing counsel.
In a ruling with potential implications for other pending generative artificial intelligence (AI) copyright cases, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH & West Publishing Corp. ROSS Intelligence Inc. some creative spark.
The product, which is in beta, generates a Microsoft Word document formatted for the federal court system. Users in state courts will have to customize the formatting to fit local requirements. Defendant’s misgivings, meaning any facts that might demonstrate the defendant’s lack of character or empathy.
The court summarizes the plaintiffs’ allegations: D.G. Seeking redress, Plaintiffs sued Defendants on the theory that their design decisions and failure to disclose the dangers of their products were the cause of D.G.s The court dismisses Roblox, Google, and Apple from the case. Plaintiffs further allege that D.G.s
Each lawsuit creates dozens or hundreds of individual dramas, few of which receive any public scrutiny, and usually comes at the cost of due process and the rule of law. ” Some details about its lawsuit: Betty’s Best sued 1,099 defendants in a single complaint. The court reduced the asset freeze from $21M to $2M.
Though Microsoft is the named defendant in the case, the real players here are the New York Times and OpenAI. In April, the court ruled on Microsoft and OpenAI’s motions to dismiss. But it’s still worth following, because these narrow and technical areas of the law are likely where these decisions are headed. The court agreed.
Under California law, “oppression is even more onerous” when a “clause pegs both the scope and procedure of the arbitration to rules which might change.” The court’s reaction is predictable if chilling. RMG decision in my Internet Law course, a terrible browsewrap decision. I still teach the 2007 Ticketmaster v.
Of the 819 total dispositions, 391 (48%) were dismissed during claims review, 153 (19%) were not served, 82 (10%) were withdrawn, and 91 (11%) had defendants opt out. If we compare the types of dispositions to the total number of dispositions, it gives up percentages.
299 limits joinder in patent cases to defendants who infringe using “the same accused product or process.” ” Congress enacted this requirement to restrict patent trolls who were filing lawsuits against defendants who had nothing in common but the allegation that they were infringing the same patent. 35 U.S.C. §
To dispose of various motions, the court must construe the statutory term “social media platform.” The court recognizes this drafting flaw: the text of the social media platform definition is broad. –the court sides with the statutory text and its massively overbroad definition.
For consumers, the primary purpose of trademark law is to act as a guarantee of the product’s quality. Ruling on trademark rights over colors, the Supreme Court in Qualitex v. In December 2023, a Turin court ruled to protect the white sole on Italian quiet luxury brand Loro Piana’s Open Walks Chukka boots.
Nikes History of Defending Its Patents Nike is no stranger to intellectual property lawsuits. Skechers (2016) Nike took Skechers to court for allegedly infringing eight Nike patents, including patents covering the Flyknit technology. The case was settled in 2022.
The post Judge Wears VR Headset To View Defendant’s Account Of Events And What Fresh Hell Is This? appeared first on Above the Law. Courtroom technology: all about coulda, not shoulda.
The defendant invoked the arbitration clause in its TOS. Extensively citing Chabolla , the court rejects the arbitration request. The court says Plex’s relationship context cuts against TOS formation. The court’s treatment of the sign-up screen’s call-to-action is perplexing (no pun intended).
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