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
The US Supreme Court granted certiorari in three new cases Wednesday, including two cases about compensation for student-athletes. The court consolidated the cases National Collegiate Athletic Association v. ” The court also granted certiorari in TransUnion LLC v. Alston and American Athletic Conference v.
The Supreme Court agreed to wade into the controversial issue of compensation for college athletes, granting National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Over 35 years ago, the Supreme Court indicated in NCAA v. Ramirez then went to federal court, alleging that TransUnion’s actions violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Notably, the jury awarded punitivedamages against the university, a relative rarity for juries but well deserved in this case. In its earlier summary judgment ruling , the court began with a discussion of the highly analogous case of Pickering v. He argued that academic integrity was being sacrificed for sports.
Assume that you successfully obtained a favourable judgment from a foreign court that orders the losing party to pay punitivedamages in addition to compensatory damages. Could the judgment be enforced in Japan where punitivedamages are considered as contrary to public policy? Thus the question above.
” As a sports figure, such allegations can have a major impact on his future contracts both with teams and advertisers. We have previously discussed retraction statutes that can limit damages or actions. Spears has given public statements and is a sports sensation. The standard was later extended to public figures.
judgments published this Friday by the CJEU – a flurry of decisions reminiscent of the madness that is the current Champions League format –, the Court decided a true ‘clásico’ of European private international law in Case C-633/22 Real Madrid Club de Fútbol. Among the 44 (!) ’ (para.
Less than a week ago, the National Collegiate Athletic Association filed a trademark infringement action in federal court against a company that runs an online sports-themed promotions and contests under the marks “April Madness” and “Final 3.” which used the mark for sports programs it produced and registered the mark in 1989.
Amid escalating behind-the-scenes tensions, Skechers filed suit against adidas in February , asking a California federal court to declare that despite adidas’s claims of infringement, it has not run afoul of the notoriously litigious German sportswear giant’s 3-stripe trademark by way of its 4-stripe Goldie-Peaks shoe. Crew’s mark.
This month the US Supreme Court granted certiorari in the case of Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc., 93A [Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act], punitivedamages. At first, a US District Court dismissed the case, which we reported here. However, the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit reversed. Beretta U.S.A.
The jury will now determine the amount of punitivedamages in a case that speaks not only to CNN but the media at large. That is probably the reason it will soon award punitivedamages. CNNs defense in court was a case study in how not to defend a defamation lawsuit. However, this is not just CNN.
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