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
Judge Thomas Parker, a judge for the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee, Friday ruled that Tennessee’s Adult Entertainment Act (AEA) is unconstitutional. In his opinion, Parker ruled that the AEA violates First Amendment rights. He stated that free speech does not extend to just words.
District Judge Renée Marie Bumb has placed a temporary block on parts of New Jersey’s gun law meant to limit the number of places individuals can carry weapons after last year’s Supreme Courtruling expanding gun rights, Daniel Han reports for Politico.
Antitrust law took center stage this week as college general counsel try to figure out the what and how of paying student athletes under a new courtruling, and the U.S. Department of Justice is trying to break up the entertainment venue dominance of Live Nation and Ticketmaster.
The court had agreed to entertain these applications on Thursday, which were mentioned before Nagarathna. Subsequently, Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud ordered the reconstitution of the bench which heard the case, in accordance with the Supreme CourtRules of 2013. The convicts’ time to surrender expired on Saturday.
It is hard not to see that listing as an obvious effort to do precisely what Hochul said: to recreate the ban by including virtually every location as a “sensitive area.”.
Today’s administrative order announcing the new policy says the court “will not entertain such a motion if filed after a clemency record has been returned to the Governor,” which happens when the court makes an affirmative clemency recommendation. (Pen. See rule 8.45 Superior Court (1999) 20 Cal.4th
Weintraub Tobin’s Intellectual Property podcast, The Briefing , published nearly 50 episodes this year covering a variety of IP issues relating to trademark, copyright, and entertainment law. Supreme Courtruled in Andy Warhol Foundation v. As we look back, we want to share The Briefing’s most popular episodes in 2023.
Objections, Delaware Chancery Courtrulings and the stock market have deeply eroded what was once expected to be a $20 million stockholder class attorney fee awarded to counsel for AMC Entertainment Inc. stockholders who recently battled the company to compromise on a dilutive share conversion plan.
14] Since Ticketmaster’s 2010 merger with Live Nation Entertainment, it has faced criticism about its size, power in the entertainment industry, and how it displays the characteristics of a monopoly. [15] 20] When the case was brought by Tickets.com, Ticketmaster and Live Nation Entertainment had not yet merged. [21]
The Supreme Court today agreed to answer this question posed by the Ninth Circuit in Another Planet Entertainment, LLC v. of California’s Supreme Court, part 2
Cochran present a frontal assault on the traditional framework under which federal courts have entertained complaints about federal agencies. The ALJ imposed a substantial monetary penalty and barred her from practice before the SEC, but the decision was vacated after the Supreme Courtruled in Lucia v.
A court denied Netflix’s request for GoTV Streaming to supply documents relating to the source of its patent litigation funding. Scott Hervey and Eric Caligiuri discuss this dispute on this episode of The Briefing by the IP Law Blog. Watch this episode on the Weintraub YouTube channel. Read more about this case here.
Brnovich is the latest in a line of cases suggesting that the federal courts should play a smaller role in the patrolling of how states administer elections. The court’s 2019 decision in Rucho v. Common Cause said that federal courts should not entertain challenges to partisan gerrymandering under the Constitution.
Enhanced and vital interpretation of “Carrying on Business” The court’s jurisdiction in the present case was established under Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act 1999 , which permits a plaintiff to file a suit in the court’s jurisdiction where it carries on business. Building on this, in Impresario Entertainment v.
The companies suggest that their interpretation is consistent with the Supreme Court’s cases interpreting three other statutes allowing review of district court orders, in which the courtruled that an appeals court can review both “the particular aspect of the order that permitted the appeal” and also “any other issues encompassed in the order.”
Supreme Courtruled Thursday that Andy Warhol’s portraits of music legend Prince did not qualify as fair use under copyright law. The decision affirms a previous ruling by the Second Circuit, which found that Warhol’s artwork shared the same commercial purpose as the original photograph taken by photographer Lynn Goldsmith.
Supreme Courtruled in Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith that Andy Warhol’s portrait of music legend Prince did not qualify as fair use under copyright law. Scott Hervey and Tara Sattler talk about this decision on this episode of The Briefing by the IP Law Blog. Watch this episode on the Weintraub YouTube channel here.
That’s because it is assumed that the use of this device is to keep the employees entertained. But they can have only one such device. Under this exception, the source of the content is not an issue. But it allows for the use of only a single radio or TV. A newer exception adopted in the 1990s goes further.
Nigrelli : where the courtruled that the private property exclusion violates the Second Amendment. New York responded roughly a week later with Senate Bill S51001 (June 30, 2022, Extraordinary Session). The new law created a target rich environment for new challenges. The new decision comes from Judge John Sinatra (W.D.N.Y.)
Moreover, individual courtrules are now requiring greater transparency. The Federal Circuit’s latest rules clearly seek to maximize public disclosure. In each filing, Rule 25.1(d) In each filing, Rule 25.1(d) As Silicon Valley’s home venue, the Northern District of California entertains numerous patent cases.
Despite this history, a new decision out of the High Court is still shocking in its implications for further attacks on free speech. The courtruled that newspapers and television stations that post articles on social media sites like Facebook are liable for other third party comments on those posts. America Online, Inc.,
The article also states, “It is critically important to understand the labyrinth of potentially applicable ethics rules that intertwine with certain courtrules on retirement.”. According to Law.com , attorney retirement in New York is “remarkably complex” with “variations of ‘retire’… used in different contexts.”
Supreme Courtruled that Texas and Louisiana lacked standing to challenge a Biden Administration immigration enforcement policy. According to the eight-member majority, “federal courts are generally not the proper forum for resolving claims that the Executive Branch should make more arrests or bring more prosecutions.”
The US Supreme Court Monday declined to review the Pennsylvania Supreme Courtruling that overturned entertainer Bill Cosby’s sexual assault conviction. In 2005, former Temple University employee Andrea Constand alleged that Cosby had sexually assaulted and drugged her.
The Commission advised them if possible, to “educate yourself on the harm it may cause Seattle’s BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color) in your pursuit of a free ticket to an event that is not expressly meant for you and your entertainment.” ” In 2014, the Courtruled 6-2 in Schuette v.
In this case, it is two forms of bingo at the Pueblo tribe’s Speaking Rock Entertainment Center near El Paso, Texas, that is primarily at issue. (It was one of Scalia’s top quips in a SCOTUSblog compilation after the justice died six years ago this month.). Two, you cover those numbers when they are drawn or somehow identified.
The case alleges sexual abuse of a 12-year-old at school, and the writ petition challenges a superior courtruling that would allow evidence at trial of other abuse subsequent to the subject abuse. The petition concerns Evidence Code sections 1106 and 783 , and the Supreme Court’s decision in Doe v. Domestic violence tort.
Now, after a major courtruling against the university , an arbitrator has awarded Negy all back pay and benefits from the time of his firing. To the contrary, the university issued a statement that indicated that it is undeterred by the adverse courtrulings. That is good news.
Share In what was only the second opinion day of the 2022-23 term, the Supreme Court delivered a rare win for a criminally convicted petitioner and offered a clarifying example of when it is appropriate for a federal court to intervene when a state court fails to apply federal law. In a 5-4 decision in Cruz v. Arizona in 2016.
Beshear has correctly cited a major victory recently before the Kentucky Supreme Court — an unanimous decision in favor of his authority to issue pandemic orders. On November 12, 2020, the Kentucky Supreme Courtruled unanimously in favor of the authority of the governor to issue pandemic orders.
Share A trade group for the adult entertainment industry will appear at the Supreme Court on Wednesday in its challenge to a Texas law that requires pornography sites to verify the age of their users before providing access for example, by requiring a government-issued identification. 1181 should be subject to strict scrutiny.
Like most states, Michigan courts’ rules for evidence — adopted from the Daubert standard, which was named after a Supreme Court decision issued almost 30 years ago — say trial judges are responsible for making sure expert testimony has a reliable foundation. Riley said again and again that he thought his brother was dead.
After more than two hours of debate on Wednesday, it was not clear whether a majority of the justices were ready to uphold the lower courtsruling. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, one of the justices on the court with teenaged children, also addressed the issue of technology and in particular the effectiveness of content-filtering software.
In February 2023, the Supreme Court of Kentucky declined a similar challenge to the abortion bans. There has been a heated debate around the right to abortion since the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization , the courtruled there is no constitutional right to abortion. In Dobbs v.
It did not entertain the possibility that the violence was not an effort to overthrow the nation but, instead, a riot. Despite support by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a courtruled against Home Depot workers who claimed a right to wear Black Lives Matter symbols at work.
When confronted with a straightforward question about the start of the Supreme Court term (Question #2), it included a reference to 28 U.S.C. 2, the federal law that directs the court to begin its term every year on the first Monday in October. The post Were not there to provide entertainment. Were there to decide cases.
She filed a discrimination lawsuit in federal court under the Oregon Public Accommodations Act’s (“OPAA”) prohibition against discrimination on the basis of gender identity. The show would likely still be entertaining, but the context and the conversation would change. It’s a completely different show. 31, 2016, 12:30 PM), [link].
At its conference yesterday, a double one, the Supreme Courtruled on a robust 164 matters. The court granted review in EpicentRx, Inc. HDI Global Insurance Company is another grant-and-hold for Another Planet Entertainment v. Actions of note included: Forum selection. Justice Groban wrote, “I.
Federal law allows federal courts to review a request for post-conviction relief only from someone who is “in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court,” the justices explained. The Supreme Court, Alito noted, “adopted this practice without even providing a convincing justification.”
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ 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