Legal News

Case Summaries

Copyright

[08/13] Jacobsen v. Katzer
In a suit alleging that defendants infringed upon plaintiff's copyright in open-source computer code by violating the copyright license's distribution and modification provisions, denial of a preliminary injunction is vacated and remanded where: 1) the limitations contained in the provisions were conditions for granting the license, and violation of the limitations would constitute copyright infringement, not mere breach of contract; and 2) remand was necessary to determine whether a presumption of irreparable harm applied.

[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of certain Steinbeck works was valid, is reversed where: 1) a subsequent agreement entered into in 1994 terminated and superseded the 1938 agreement; 2) the notice of termination was therefore invalid; and 3) the 1994 agreement remains in effect.

[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of certain Steinbeck works was valid, is reversed where: 1) a subsequent agreement entered into in 1994 terminated and superseded the 1938 agreement; 2) the notice of termination was therefore invalid; and 3) the 1994 agreement remains in effect.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...

Intellectual Property

[08/19] Cooper Techs. Co. v. Dudas
A determination by the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) of which applications constitute "original applications" for which inter partes reexamination is available under the American Inventors Protection Act (AIPA) is affirmed where: 1) the PTO's determination was entitled to Chevron deference; and 2) in the absence of clear Congressional intent as to the meaning of "original application," the PTO's interpretation of the term was a reasonable construction.

[08/19] DSW, Inc. v. Shoe Pavilion, Inc.
In a suit alleging infringement of two patents for storing and displaying footwear for customer self-service, summary judgment of non-infringement of one patent and no liability for damages for past infringement of both patents is vacated and remanded where: 1) the finding of non-infringement was based on incorrect construction of claims; and 2) patent infringement is a strict liability offense, and an infringer's reasonable steps and good faith efforts to cease infringing activity are insufficient to avoid damages.

[08/19] In Re Cygnus Telecomm. Tech., LLC, Patent Litig.
In a patent dispute over computerized callback systems designed to lower the cost of overseas telephone calls, summary judgment of invalidity and dismissal of trade secret appropriation claims are affirmed where: 1) plaintiff was not collaterally estopped from appealing the invalidity finding despite not having named all defendants in its appeal; 2) plaintiffs produced no evidence disputing a statement by the inventor regarding the date on which he had reduced the invention to practice; 3) sales of a device that embodied the patent claims subjected the patent to invalidation despite that device's not being ready for sale on a commercial scale; and 4) the statute of limitations barred plaintiff's claim for misappropriation of trade secrets.

More...

Education

[08/19] L.M. v. Capistrano Unified Sch. Dist.
In an action brought under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, an order requiring school district to reimburse parents for the cost of in-home services for their autistic child and an award of attorney's fees are reversed in part and vacated in part where: 1) the district court failed to consider whether the school district's policy of limiting parents' classroom observational opportunities to twenty minutes was harmless because parents nevertheless had a full opportunity to participate in the process to fashion an appropriate educational plan for their child with help from an informed and knowledgeable expert; and 2) there was no evidence to support a finding that parents' right to participate was "significantly affected".

[08/15] Riehm v. Engelking
In an action arising from the detention of a high school student who wrote an essay detailing a fantasy murder-suicide inspired by the Columbine school shooting, summary judgment to county and school officials is affirmed where: 1) the essay qualified as a true threat and was not protected under the First Amendment; 2) a Fourth Amendment claim failed because defendant acted pursuant to a court order and reasonably relied in good faith on a valid ex parte order; and 3) state law clams also failed.

[08/14] Somoza v. New York City Dept. of Educ.
In a suit brought by plaintiffs under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), plaintiff's motion to dismiss appeal is denied, order of district court is reversed, and grant of preliminary injunction enjoining defendant-New York City Department of Education from terminating funding for plaintiff's educational services is dissolved where plaintiff's claims under the IDEA were barred by the statute of limitations.

More...

Tax Law

[08/19] US v. City of New York
In a qui tam False Claims Act action challenging a local law requiring non-resident city employee-plaintiffs to pay a fee equivalent to the municipal income taxes paid by resident city-employees, motion to dismiss plaintiffs' appeal is granted where: 1) since the government has declined to intervene in a False Claims action, it is not a party to the action within the meaning of Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1); and therefore, 2) a notice of appeal had to be filed within 30 days.

[08/15] County of Humboldt v. McKee
In an action by county to assess property taxes on defendants for parcels transferred to third party purchasers, decision in favor of defendants is reversed where: 1) subsequent to the adoption of the 1978 Guidelines, which set forth revised regulations governing agricultural preserves, the parties voluntarily renewed their contract numerous times; 2) the new contract created with each renewal incorporated the 1978 Guidelines; and 3) thus, the 1978 Guidelines can be applied constitutionally to a Williamson Act contract executed in 1977.

[08/15] Wright v. Everson
In matter in which IRS-registered unenrolled tax preparer-plaintiff challenged the validity of 31 C.F.R. section 10.7(c)(1)(viii) claiming that it unlawfully and arbitrarily limits his right to represent tax payers before the IRS, grant of summary judgment in favor of the government is affirmed where: 1) Congress expressly delegated authority to the Secretary to promulgate regulations governing who may practice before the IRS; and 2) this was a reasonable regulation which was not arbitrary, capricious, or manifestly contrary to the statute.

More...

Corporation & Enterprise Law

[08/19] Joyce v. Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.
In a suit by shareholders of a telecommunications company alleging that defendant, while advising the company during its acquisition by another company, failed to advise plaintiffs on minimizing their exposure to financial losses, grant of a motion to dismiss is affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part where: 1) plaintiffs were bringing a direct action on their own behalf, not a derivative one on behalf of the corporation, and to that extent had standing; but 2) plaintiffs' constructive fraud claim required them to allege that defendant owed them a fiduciary duty, but no such duty never arose.

[08/15] CA Inc. v. AFSCME Employees Pension Plan
Two certified questions, arising from an action before the SEC to determine whether respondent-shareholders' proposed bylaw requiring reimbursement of proxy expenses should be included in petitioner-corporation's annual proxy materials, are answered affirmatively where: 1) respondents' proposal was a proper subject for action by shareholders; and 2) the proposal, if adopted, would cause petitioner to violate state law because it would in some cases curtail the directors' ability to fully exercise their fiduciary duties. (Republished Opinion)

[08/12] In the Matter of Yorkshire LLC
Bankruptcy court's order sanctioning debtors for filing two bankruptcy petitions in bad faith is affirmed where the bankruptcy court did not err in concluding that the bankruptcy cases had been filed with a bad motive and with no meaningful thought being given to the actual purposes of Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

More...

Elder Law

[05/13] Cao v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
In an action wherein plaintiff sought recovery under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 for alleged constitutional violations along with several state law causes of action after she was removed from her home, made to undergo a psychological evaluation, and placed in a state institution for the elderly, dismissal of plaintiff's complaint is affirmed where: 1) the district court properly dismissed plaintiff's section 1983 claim as untimely; and 2) with no federal cause of action remaining, the district court acted within its discretion in declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over remaining state law claims.

[05/05] Miller v. Am. Airlines, Inc.
In a suit against American Airlines under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) a collective bargaining agreement did not require that plaintiffs be offered positions of comparable pay past the retirement age; 2) a claim, that a supplement to the collective bargaining agreement governing the retirement of flight engineers was facially discriminatory, was not properly raised before the EEOC.

[03/11] Budnick v. Town of Carefree
In an action raising, inter alia, a claim that defendant-town violated the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (FHAA) by denying plaintiffs a Special Use Permit (SUP) to build a multi-level continuing-care retirement community in the town, summary judgment against plaintiffs on the FHAA claim is affirmed where plaintiff failed to establish a discrimination claim under any of the theories of disparate treatment, disparate impact, or a failure to make reasonable accommodations. Potential residents of a retirement community do not presently qualify as disabled under the FHAA simply because some of them will become disabled as they age.

More...

Constitutional Law

[08/19] Fellner v. Tri-Union Seafoods, L.L.C.
In a class-action suit alleging injury caused by methylmercury and other harmful compounds in defendant's canned tuna products, grant of a motion to dismiss is reversed and remanded where: 1) the FDA had not enacted a pervasive regulatory scheme regarding mercury in tuna that would preempt plaintiff's state-law claims; 2) the FDA's decision not to require warning labels on tuna was not a conclusive determination preempting a state failure-to-warn claim; and 3) the FDA had not expressly rejected mercury warnings as misbranding under federal law.

[08/18] N. Coast Women's Care Med. Group, Inc.
The rights of religious freedom and free speech, as guaranteed in both the federal and the California Constitutions, do not exempt a medical clinic's physicians from complying with the California Unruh Civil Rights Act's prohibition against discrimination based on a person's sexual orientation.

[08/18] Alternate Fuels, Inc. v. Cabanas
In an action against Missouri Department of Natural Resources officials claiming denial of equal protection, tortious interference with contract, and First Amendment retaliation, partial summary judgment for defendant on the First Amendment claim and judgment pursuant to jury verdict for plaintiff on the tortious-interference claim are affirmed where: 1) plaintiff had no standing to assert the First Amendment claim; 2) defendant's motions for judgment as a matter of law could not be the basis of an appeal; 3) the district court properly refused defendant's "official duties" and "official immunity" instructions; and 4) the district court had subject matter jurisdiction over the tortious-interference claim.

More...

Workers' Comp

[08/18] US v. Simpson
A sentence and order of restitution imposed for defendant's crime of mail fraud, involving his underreporting of payroll information for his businesses to his workers' compensation insurance carriers, is affirmed where the district court correctly concluded that the "loss" caused by this conduct was the amount of additional premiums that the insurance carriers would have charged had they been given accurate information.

[08/11] Ridings v. Riverside Med. Ctr.
In an employee's suit alleging violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and state worker's compensation law, summary judgment for defendant-employer is affirmed where: 1) an interference claim failed because evidence regarding plaintiff's invocation of FMLA, and defendant's requests that she provide adequate medical certification, did not demonstrate that plaintiff was entitled to leave under the FMLA and that defendant denied her FMLA benefits to which she was entitled; 2) defendant could not be deemed to have retaliated against plaintiff by asking her to fulfill her obligations under the FMLA; and 3) a state-law retaliation claim failed as defendant articulated a valid basis for terminating plaintiff, and plaintiff failed to demonstrate sufficient evidence to show that such basis was pretext.

[08/08] Mt. Diablo Unified Sch. Dist. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
Temporary disability payments commence when a school district pays an injured employee his or her normal wages under Education Code section 44043.

More...

Cyberspace

[08/19] In Re Cygnus Telecomm. Tech., LLC, Patent Litig.
In a patent dispute over computerized callback systems designed to lower the cost of overseas telephone calls, summary judgment of invalidity and dismissal of trade secret appropriation claims are affirmed where: 1) plaintiff was not collaterally estopped from appealing the invalidity finding despite not having named all defendants in its appeal; 2) plaintiffs produced no evidence disputing a statement by the inventor regarding the date on which he had reduced the invention to practice; 3) sales of a device that embodied the patent claims subjected the patent to invalidation despite that device's not being ready for sale on a commercial scale; and 4) the statute of limitations barred plaintiff's claim for misappropriation of trade secrets.

[08/15] US v. Ganoe
Convictions for receipt and possession of child pornography are affirmed primarily as: 1) the district court acted within its discretion in allowing the jury to briefly view a carefully limited number of images that were the subjects of the charged offenses; and 2) denial of a motion to suppress evidence obtained by a federal agent using peer-to-peer software was proper as defendant lacked an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in the files.

[08/14] In re: Dynamic Random Access Memory (DRAM) Antitrust Litig.
In an antitrust action brought against U.S. and foreign manufacturers and sellers of DRAM computer memory by a British computer manufacturer that purchased DRAM outside of the U.S., dismissal of the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvement Act (FTAIA) is affirmed where: 1) "but for" causation cannot suffice for the FTAIA domestic injury exception to apply, and instead a direct or proximate causal relationship is required; 2) under such standard, plaintiff failed to establish a causal link between the domestic effects of higher U.S. prices for DRAM and its foreign injury; and 3) there was no abuse of discretion in denying leave to amend.

More...

Dispute Resolution & Arbitration

[08/15] RN Solution, Inc. v. Catholic Healthcare W.
In a contract matter, order denying defendants' motions to compel arbitration is reversed where: 1) the trial court lacked discretion under Code of Civil Procedure section 1280 to deny arbitration of causes of action covered by the arbitration clause; and 2) battery-related tort claims did not come within the arbitration clause.

[08/13] Estate of Thottam
In a mediation matter relating to distribution of assets to the three children of the deceased, judgment is reversed where: 1) there is nothing in Evidence Code section 1123(c) requiring that an express agreement in writing permitting disclosure be contained in a settlement agreement; 2) the court erred in reading a timing requirement into section 1123(c); 3) the mediation and facilitation confidentiality agreement satisfied the exception to mediation confidentiality under section 1123(c); and 4) there was sufficient evidence before the court to establish the preliminary fact that a chart created at the mediation was a settlement agreement for purposes of section 1123(c).

[07/23] Thompson v. Toll Dublin, LLC
In a matter involving various fraud-related claims arising from the purchase of condominiums built and/or sold by defendants, denial of defendants' petition to compel arbitration and stay proceedings is affirmed where: 1) the arbitration agreement did not apply to plaintiffs' fraud-related claims; and 2) the arbitration provisions were, in any event, unconscionable and therefore unenforceable.

More...

Labor & Employment Law

[08/19] Tyson v. Gannett Co., Inc.
In an employee's suit alleging racial discrimination and retaliation, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff provided no evidence that she had complied with the requirement to file a charge of racial discrimination with the EEOC prior to bringing a Title VII claim; and 2) plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to establish that a similarly situated white employee was treated more favorably, and thus failed to make out a prima facie case in her 42 U.S.C. section 1981 claim.

[08/19] King v. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co.
In a malicious prosecution suit alleging that defendant fired plaintiff without probable cause to believe that she had stolen train tickets, denial of plaintiff's discovery motion and summary judgment for defendants are affirmed where: 1) a determination by the System Board of Adjustment that plaintiff had stolen from defendant did not preclude litigation of that question in the context of the malicious prosecution suit; but 2) plaintiff failed to produce evidence of the date on which defendant had filed a criminal complaint against her, and thus would not be able to prove her claim that defendant lacked probable cause at the time of the filing.

[08/19] In Re: Nortel Networks Corp. Securities Litig.
In a matter involving attorneys' fees following settlement of a private securities class action, judgment awarding 3% of the class's recovery to class counsel rather than the requested 8.5% is affirmed where: 1) appellant has waived its argument that the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act altered the fee-award scheme for cases covered by the Act by failing to present this argument to the district court; and 2) the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding a reasonable fee under established precedent.

More...

Commercial Law

[08/19] DSW, Inc. v. Shoe Pavilion, Inc.
In a suit alleging infringement of two patents for storing and displaying footwear for customer self-service, summary judgment of non-infringement of one patent and no liability for damages for past infringement of both patents is vacated and remanded where: 1) the finding of non-infringement was based on incorrect construction of claims; and 2) patent infringement is a strict liability offense, and an infringer's reasonable steps and good faith efforts to cease infringing activity are insufficient to avoid damages.

[08/18] Golden W. Refining Co. v. SunTrust Bank
In an action brought by plaintiff to draw on a letter of credit issued to it by defendant-bank's predecessor, judgment for plaintiff is affirmed over claims that the district court erred by: 1) holding that the letter of credit was not "perpetual" under Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) section 5-106(d) and thereby had not automatically expired before plaintiff made a draw against it; 2) by rejecting defendant's waiver argument; and 3) by concluding that plaintiff's specific performance and breach of contract claims were not precluded by the exclusive remedies available under Article 5 of the UCC.

[08/18] Am. Needle, Inc. v. Nat'l Football League
In an antitrust case alleging that the NFL's exclusive headwear licensing agreement with Reebok International violated sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) a motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f) to allow additional discovery was properly denied where plaintiff did not identify the evidence it sought to discover; 2) NFL teams are a "single entity" for purposes of licensing their intellectual property; and 3) as a single entity, the teams were free to license their intellectual property on an exclusive basis.

More...

Probate Trusts

[08/13] Estate of Thottam
In a mediation matter relating to distribution of assets to the three children of the deceased, judgment is reversed where: 1) there is nothing in Evidence Code section 1123(c) requiring that an express agreement in writing permitting disclosure be contained in a settlement agreement; 2) the court erred in reading a timing requirement into section 1123(c); 3) the mediation and facilitation confidentiality agreement satisfied the exception to mediation confidentiality under section 1123(c); and 4) there was sufficient evidence before the court to establish the preliminary fact that a chart created at the mediation was a settlement agreement for purposes of section 1123(c).

[08/01] Estate of Molino
In probate proceedings involving appellant's claims that he had valid assignments entitling him to a percentage of respondents' inheritance, summary judgment against appellant is affirmed where: 1) the 1997 agreements were not enforceable as they were void as against public policy; and 2) appellant could not rely on ratification or laches to enforce the agreements.

[07/16] Perrin v. Lee
In a probate proceeding, denial of plaintiffs' section 21320 safe harbor petition for a determination that their proposed petition to invalidate two trust amendments would not be a contest within the meaning of a no contest clause in a trust is reversed where: 1) the trust did not explicitly state that a contest to an amendment would violate the no contest clause; and 2) the no contest clause was not incorporated by reference into the amendments.

More...

Communications Law

[08/19] In Re Cygnus Telecomm. Tech., LLC, Patent Litig.
In a patent dispute over computerized callback systems designed to lower the cost of overseas telephone calls, summary judgment of invalidity and dismissal of trade secret appropriation claims are affirmed where: 1) plaintiff was not collaterally estopped from appealing the invalidity finding despite not having named all defendants in its appeal; 2) plaintiffs produced no evidence disputing a statement by the inventor regarding the date on which he had reduced the invention to practice; 3) sales of a device that embodied the patent claims subjected the patent to invalidation despite that device's not being ready for sale on a commercial scale; and 4) the statute of limitations barred plaintiff's claim for misappropriation of trade secrets.

[08/19] Joyce v. Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.
In a suit by shareholders of a telecommunications company alleging that defendant, while advising the company during its acquisition by another company, failed to advise plaintiffs on minimizing their exposure to financial losses, grant of a motion to dismiss is affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part where: 1) plaintiffs were bringing a direct action on their own behalf, not a derivative one on behalf of the corporation, and to that extent had standing; but 2) plaintiffs' constructive fraud claim required them to allege that defendant owed them a fiduciary duty, but no such duty never arose.

[08/18] Yabsley v. Cingular Wireless, LLC
In a claim that defendant-Cingular engaged in unfair competition in violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200 and misleading advertising by failing to inform consumer that a tax would be imposed on the full price of the cellular phone, judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed where: 1) when specific legislation provides a safe harbor, plaintiffs may not use the general unfair competition law to assault that harbor; 2) a sales invoice Cingular gave to plaintiff stated the amount of the sales tax imposed on the sale and gave plaintiff notice of the amount of sales tax that would imposed; and 3) plaintiff had the right to refuse to enter into the contract for the price stated.

More...

Administrative Law

[08/19] Fellner v. Tri-Union Seafoods, L.L.C.
In a class-action suit alleging injury caused by methylmercury and other harmful compounds in defendant's canned tuna products, grant of a motion to dismiss is reversed and remanded where: 1) the FDA had not enacted a pervasive regulatory scheme regarding mercury in tuna that would preempt plaintiff's state-law claims; 2) the FDA's decision not to require warning labels on tuna was not a conclusive determination preempting a state failure-to-warn claim; and 3) the FDA had not expressly rejected mercury warnings as misbranding under federal law.

[08/19] Cooper Techs. Co. v. Dudas
A determination by the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) of which applications constitute "original applications" for which inter partes reexamination is available under the American Inventors Protection Act (AIPA) is affirmed where: 1) the PTO's determination was entitled to Chevron deference; and 2) in the absence of clear Congressional intent as to the meaning of "original application," the PTO's interpretation of the term was a reasonable construction.

[08/19] Tyson v. Gannett Co., Inc.
In an employee's suit alleging racial discrimination and retaliation, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff provided no evidence that she had complied with the requirement to file a charge of racial discrimination with the EEOC prior to bringing a Title VII claim; and 2) plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to establish that a similarly situated white employee was treated more favorably, and thus failed to make out a prima facie case in her 42 U.S.C. section 1981 claim.

More...

Injury & Tort Law

[08/19] Joyce v. Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.
In a suit by shareholders of a telecommunications company alleging that defendant, while advising the company during its acquisition by another company, failed to advise plaintiffs on minimizing their exposure to financial losses, grant of a motion to dismiss is affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part where: 1) plaintiffs were bringing a direct action on their own behalf, not a derivative one on behalf of the corporation, and to that extent had standing; but 2) plaintiffs' constructive fraud claim required them to allege that defendant owed them a fiduciary duty, but no such duty never arose.

[08/19] King v. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co.
In a malicious prosecution suit alleging that defendant fired plaintiff without probable cause to believe that she had stolen train tickets, denial of plaintiff's discovery motion and summary judgment for defendants are affirmed where: 1) a determination by the System Board of Adjustment that plaintiff had stolen from defendant did not preclude litigation of that question in the context of the malicious prosecution suit; but 2) plaintiff failed to produce evidence of the date on which defendant had filed a criminal complaint against her, and thus would not be able to prove her claim that defendant lacked probable cause at the time of the filing.

[08/19] US v. Flaherty
In an action brought under the False Claims Act alleging that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) provided a reimbursement check to defendant as a result of a fraudulent scheme, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where qui tam actions cannot be brought pro se.

More...