Case Summaries

Commercial Law

[09/05] Sindecuse v. Katsaros
In a case alleging common law fraud surrounding a stock purchase, grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed where the allegedly fraudulent statements could not support claims of fraud because they were: 1) predictions of the future; and 2) a promise of future action not accompanied by a present intent not to perform.

[09/04] Am. Bankers Ass'n v. Lockyer
After remand, in a case interpreting California's Financial Information Privacy Act (FIPA) in light of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), a ruling that the FRCA entirely preempted FIPA section 4053(b)(1), which restricts the sharing of nonpublic consumer personal information between financial institutions and their affiliates, is reversed and remanded where the preempted portions of FIPA are severable, narrowing FIPA section 4053(b)(1) to exclude consumer report information as defined by the FCRA.

More...

Contracts

[09/05] Oglala Sioux Tribe v. C & W Enters.
In a construction contract dispute involving a federally recognized Native American tribe, an order enjoining a South Dakota state court from confirming an arbitration award against the Oglala Sioux Tribe for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is vacated and remanded where: 1) three of the four contracts subject of the arbitration contained explicit waivers of the tribe's sovereign immunity; and 2) the tribe waived sovereign immunity as to the fourth contract by agreeing to include it in the same arbitration.

[09/05] Pachter v. Bernard Hodes Group
In a claim brought by former employee-plaintiff challenging legality of deductions under Article 6 section 193 of the New York Labor law taken by employer-defendant, decision in favor of plaintiff is reversed and remanded after answers by New York Court of Appeals to certified questions resolved the case, where: 1) because New York Labor Law Article 6, section 193 includes executives unless otherwise excluded, plaintiff is covered; however, 2) plaintiff's cause of action fails because it is undisputed that plaintiff knowingly acquiesced over a period of years to the approach used by defendant when calculating her commissions, conduct that constituted an implied agreement between parties; and 3) as an implied agreement does not violate "section 193 nor any other provision of article 6 of the Labor Law," the deductions in question did not violate that provision.

More...

Copyright

[09/03] Omega v. Costco Wholesale Corp.
In a copyright infringement action under 17 U.S.C. sections 106(3) and 602(a), grant of summary judgment for defendant is reversed and remanded where non-counterfeit goods were first sold outside the U.S. and then imported for sale in the U.S. without the copyright holder's authorization, thus the first sale doctrine, section 109(a), does not apply.

[08/13] Penguin Group (USA) Inc. v. Steinbeck
In an action under the Copyright Act, summary judgment for defendants, on the grounds that a notice purporting to terminate a 1938 agreement granting licenses for publications of certain Steinbeck works was valid, is reversed where: 1) a subsequent agreement entered into in 1994 terminated and superseded the 1938 agreement; 2) the notice of termination was therefore invalid; and 3) the 1994 agreement remains in effect.

More...

Family Law

[09/03] Johansen v. Comm. of Internal Revenue
In a tax case arising out of a divorce, a holding by the Tax Court that spousal support payments qualify as alimony to be reported as income by the payee is affirmed where: 1) state law requires that spousal support payments terminate on the death of either spouse unless otherwise agreed in writing; and 2) the divorce agreement does not extend spousal support payments beyond death of either party.

[09/03] Alanis-Alvarado v. Mukasey
Petition for review of deportation order is denied where petitioner violated a protection order issued under California Family Code Section 6320, which by definition fits categorically within the protection orders whose violation qualifies as a deportable offense under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

More...

Trademark

[09/04] Empresa Cubana Del Tabaco v. Culbro Corp.
In a case arising from a dispute over the ownership of the COHIBA mark on cigars sold in the U.S., denial of motion directing U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to dismiss pending petitions to cancel defendant's registration of the trademark, is affirmed where the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the relief requested.

[08/28] Venture Tape Corp. v. McGills Glass Warehouse
In a Lanham Act claim of liability for infringement of the registered trademarks "Venture Tape" and "Venture Foil", judgment in favor of plaintiff-manufacturer and award of equitable share of defendant-retailer's profits are affirmed where: 1) defendant admitted that his purpose in using the Venture marks was to lure customers to his website; and 2) the profits award was sufficiently substantial to serve the purposes of recovering a "rough measure" of the likely harm incurred, preventing infringer's unjust enrichment, and deterring further infringement, without being unduly large or burdensome.

More...