A trademark fight that celebrates its third birthday in the U.S. District Court, D. Minn., in less than two weeks, is set for court trial on February 8. Louis Roederer’s Cristal-brand champagne sells for over $150/bottle. Defendant’s Cristalino “Brut Cava” (not champagne, the defendant will no doubt stress) is less than $10/bottle. U.S. Judge Joan […]
[12/11/09 UPDATE: The Minnesota Litigator jumped the gun. Before the appeal comes Fair Isaac’s motion for an amended judgment, judgment as a matter of law, a new trial or, in the alternative, findings of fact filed 12/10/09.] In a large lawsuit covered in this blog previously here (discovery deadline dispute), here (technology in the courtroom), […]
If, hypothetically, your business were devising a business strategy that could, if successful, severely impact if not destroy another business, should you “reasonably foresee” litigation at the outset of implementing that business strategy? A person must preserve documents that the person knows or should know will be discoverable in “reasonably foreseeable” litigation. In the hypothetical, […]
It might sometimes seem that courts have a bit of a split personality regarding technology in the courtroom, both taking pride in high-tech courtroom features and famously proclaiming that some technology will only come into the court over the judge’s dead body. Of course, the important distinction is whether the high-tech features are there to […]
Update: The Fair Isaac litigation was the subject of an earlier entry (below), a skirmish about deadlines. A deadline, again, is the subject of motion practice. This time it is a motion to exclude Experian’s amended exhibit list as untimely, set for hearing tomorrow afternoon, less than ten days before the scheduled start of trial […]
There have been two recent rulings on local patent infringement trials, past and, by all indications, imminent, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. Move over, United States District Court, E.D. Texas (Marshall Division), once thought of as “ground zero” for U.S. patent infringement litigation? (Don’t bet on it.) Even if the […]
Particularly given the fact that attorneys’ fees often eat into plaintiff’s recoveries, it is a bitter pill when a plaintiff wins on liability but is awarded a fraction of its damages. Such was the case in Hyundai Motor Finance Co. v. McKay (below) in which the Arkansas jury agreed that defendant McKay breached its financing […]
Plaintiff Newinksi worked for Northern States Power (NSP) during which time he worked with Defendant Crane’s abestos-containing products, which, he alleged, caused his mesothelioma. Newinski also dealt with asbestos-containing products from other manufacturers, but less so. The case involved three defendants and four other potential suppliers of harmful asbestos-containing products that may have contributed to […]
Jammie Thomas-Rasset, the defendant in the copyright infringement case brought against her by the record labels, socked with $1.9 million verdict in $80,000 increments for different songs/different record labels. Most ironic: Reba McEntire’s, “One Honest Heart”? Gloria Estefan, “Rhythm is Going to Get You”? “Don’t Stop Believin’,” by Journey? Sheryl Crow, “Run, Baby, Run”? Thomas-Rasset […]
The Thomas-Rasset trial, discussed below, appears headed to the jury. Below are the jury instructions. Jury Instructions in Thomas-Rasset Copyright Case
- 1
- 2