News & Analysis as of

Motion to Dismiss Release Agreements

Lewitt Hackman

Franchisor 101: Pizza Franchisor’s Release Overcooked

Lewitt Hackman on

A federal district court denied a pizza franchisor’s motion to dismiss a former franchisee’s complaint, finding the former franchisee sufficiently pleaded the franchisor coerced the franchisee into signing a general release....more

Winstead PC

Business Divorce: Exiting Member of LLC May Still Owe Fiduciary Duties

Winstead PC on

In Villareal v. Saenz, two co-owners of a limited liability company sued each other regarding conduct surrounding a business divorce. 5-20-CV-00571-OLG-RBF, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94183 (W.D. Tex. May 18, 2021)....more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

A Lucky Day at the Supreme Court for Lucky Brand

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Lucky Brand has emerged victorious in the latest skirmish of its nearly 20-year trademark litigation battle with Marcel Fashions, a competitor in the apparel business. In Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group,...more

Proskauer - Minding Your Business

Supreme Court Narrowly Rejects Second Circuit’s Sweeping “Defense Preclusion” Doctrine

Earlier this month, the United States Supreme Court unanimously rebuffed the Second Circuit’s attempt to expand the scope of res judicata to include the so-called concept of “defense preclusion” – a novel doctrine that would...more

Fish & Richardson

A Lucky Day for Lucky Brand: U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Second Circuit's Defense Preclusion Test - The Court rules in favor of...

Fish & Richardson on

On May 14, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lucky Brand Dungarees Inc., et al. v. Marcel Fashions Group, Inc. that Lucky Brand was not precluded from raising a defense that it could have raised in a previous trademark...more

McCarter & English, LLP

Some Brands Have All The Luck

The Supreme Court has now resolved a nearly 20-year legal battle between Lucky Brand Dungarees and Marcel Fashions Group over their respective trademarks. The ruling is important to trademark owners because it reinforces how...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Lucky Brand v. Marcel: Lucky Brand Gets Lucky on Claim Preclusion

The outdated pair of acid washed jeans that your dad wears to mow the lawn seem brand new in comparison to the nearly 20 years of litigation between Lucky Brand and Marcel over the use of various “Lucky” trademarks. Last...more

Goulston & Storrs PC

Supreme Court Changes Lucky Brand’s Luck in 20-Year Trademark Dispute

Goulston & Storrs PC on

On May 14, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its opinion in the latest round of a 20-year long trademark dispute between Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. and Marcel Fashion Group, Inc. over the use of “Lucky.” ...more

Jackson Walker

Supreme Court Addresses “Defense Preclusion” as a Component of Res Judicata in New Trademark Decision

Jackson Walker on

In Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group, Inc., the United States Supreme Court recently considered for the first time whether and the extent to which it should recognize “defense preclusion” as a valid...more

Jones Day

A Lucky Day for Lucky Brand: U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Second Circuit's Defense Preclusion Test - The Court rules in favor of...

Jones Day on

In a unanimous opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of jeans manufacturer, Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. ("Lucky"), in its protracted trademark battle with Marcel Fashions Group, Inc. ("Marcel"), holding that Lucky...more

Akerman LLP - Marks, Works & Secrets

After Almost 20 Years of Litigation, “Lucky” Finally Gets Lucky

On May 14, 2020, the United States Supreme Court held in Lucky Brand Dungarees Inc., et al. v. Marcel Fashion Group Inc., that a party is not precluded from raising new defenses, when a subsequent lawsuit between the same...more

Blank Rome LLP

Lucky Brand Gets Lucky in Trademark Fight: SCOTUS Unanimously Strikes Opponent’s Novel Defense Preclusion Theory

Blank Rome LLP on

Competitors with similar trademarks can find themselves in long-running trademark disputes, making for bitter rivals. Multiple rounds of litigation are not only contentious, but also expose litigants to procedural pitfalls....more

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP

Marcel Fashions Group did not “get lucky” with the doctrine of defense preclusion

On May 14, 2020, in a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Sotomayor, the US Supreme Court overturned the “defense preclusion” doctrine proposed by the Second Circuit, upholding the requirement that preclusion of a defense...more

BakerHostetler

No Luck Needed for Lucky Brand at the Supreme Court

BakerHostetler on

The Supreme Court yesterday issued its second trademark decision of this term. In Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group, Inc., Case No. 18-1086 (S. Ct. May 14, 2020), the ultimate question before the Court was...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court - May 14, 2020

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group, Inc., No. 18-1086: Petitioner Lucky Brand Dungarees and respondent Marcel Fashions Group have been engaged in three separate rounds of trademark-related litigation over a...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashion Group, Inc.

On May 14, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashion Group, Inc., No. 18-1086, holding that a party is not precluded from raising defenses submitted in earlier...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

US Supreme Court Rejects ‘Defense Preclusion’ in Trademark Suit

On May 14, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a circuit split, finding that any preclusion of litigation defenses must comply with traditional res judicata principles, and ruling that Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. (Lucky...more

Snell & Wilmer

Supreme Court Determines No Claim Preclusion of Defense in Trademark Infringement Suit

Snell & Wilmer on

Today, a unanimous Supreme Court held in Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group., Inc. that claim preclusion did not prevent Lucky Brand from asserting a defense it failed to fully litigate in a prior lawsuit...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Defense in Trademark Action Not Precluded by Failure to Raise Same Defense in Earlier Action

The Supreme Court unanimously held this week that Lucky Brand was not precluded from mounting a new defense in its litigation with Marcel Fashions Group — despite having chosen not to bring up the same defense in a prior...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Supreme Court Rules That Lucky Brand Is Not Precluded from Raising a Defense in a Later Suit for Failing to Litigate the Defense...

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in a long-running trademark dispute: Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc., et al. v. Marcel Fashions Group, Inc., No.  The question presented to the Court was whether Lucky...more

Lewitt Hackman

Franchisor 101: Hot Doggin' Franchisee Sales Pitches

Lewitt Hackman on

Hot dog franchisor, Charlie Graingers, was unable to obtain dismissal of a federal lawsuit brought by franchisees alleging fraud, misrepresentation and breach of fiduciary duty....more

Genova Burns LLC

Beware the Boilerplate: New Jersey Court Finds Discrimination from Language in an Unsigned Settlement Agreement

Genova Burns LLC on

Just in time for Halloween, on October 31, 2018, a New Jersey federal court held that an unsigned, non-binding separation agreement could provide relevant background evidence of age discrimination, and that employers anywhere...more

Zuckerman Spaeder LLP

Hold on to Your (Top) Hat: ERISA Section 502(a)(3) May Be Used to Enforce the Terms of a “Top-Hat” Benefits Plan

Zuckerman Spaeder LLP on

Thanksgiving is typically a time for gratitude, gathering with family, and acts of kindness among fellow men and women. But in one recent case, a bank used Thanksgiving to force-feed a separation agreement to its outgoing...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Second Circuit Finds FCA Claims about Night-Vision Goggles Lack Sufficient Particularity

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

On Wednesday, May 25, 2016, the Second Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision to dismiss FCA claims alleging that defendants supplied $1.5 billion worth of deficient night-vision goggles to the U.S. military. United...more

24 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide