SCOTUS applies the "discovery rule" in timely copyright infringement claim; Cher wins in Marital Settlement Agreement vs Copyright Grant Termination Notices; Student Athletes Win Revenue Share and NIL
In a case of first impression, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that there is no “sophisticated plaintiff” exception to the Copyright Act’s discovery rule, which provides that a copyright claim only accrues...more
The Supreme Court recently ruled 6-3 in the case of Warner Chappell Music, Inc., et al. v. Nealy, et al. that producer Sherman Nealy may claim damages for an unlicensed sample of his work used in Flo Rida’s 2008 hit song “In...more
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on May 9th, 2024, in the case of Warner Chappell Music, Inc., et al., v. Nealy, et al., that plaintiffs in a copyright ownership dispute can recover damages beyond the three-year statute of...more
On May 9, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Warner Chappell Music Inc. et al. v. Nealy et al., holding that a plaintiff can seek damages for past infringement that had occurred earlier than the three-year statute...more
In a victory for copyright owners, the US Supreme Court confirmed in a recent case that copyright owners who sue for infringement may recover money damages that are not limited to the three-year period before filing suit....more
A split Supreme Court has decided that, under a plain reading of the Copyright Act, a party alleging copyright infringement may obtain damages for the entire damages period, so long as the suit itself is timely brought....more
On May 9, 2024, in a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit’s prior ruling, holding that a plaintiff with a timely infringement claim under the discovery...more
The Colorado Supreme Court on November 20, 2023, issued a long-awaited decision that reversed a 2021 panel of the Colorado Court of Appeals by rejecting the universal application of the “commercial discovery rule” to Colorado...more
The Supreme Court of the United States agreed to consider whether a copyright plaintiff’s timely claim under the discovery rule is subject to retrospective relief for infringement occurring more than three years before the...more
In an unpublished opinion from the Pennsylvania Superior Court handed down on August 31, 2023, a long-standing disagreement about the wording of Pennsylvania's Statute of Repose was finally resolved. In Pennsylvania, “a civil...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court’s infringement determination, finding that the copyright owner’s claims were timely since they were brought within three years of discovering the...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit furthered a circuit split in holding that, as a matter of first impression, a copyright plaintiff’s timely claim under the discovery rule is subject to retrospective relief for...more
On December 15, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the pleading-stage dismissal, as time-barred, of a case against Bank of New York Mellon by defrauded investors in the Allen Stanford Ponzi scheme....more
Arendi S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics Inc., Appeal No. 2021-1967 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 7, 2022) - In our Case of the Week, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the District of Delaware’s application of the...more
The Copyright Act prescribes a three-year statute of limitations (17 U.S.C. § 507(b)), and the default “incident of injury” rule dictates that the three-year clock starts running when the infringement occurs. However, when a...more
In Mondoux v. Vanghel, No. 2018-219, 2021 R.I. LEXIS 2, 2021 WL 264542, the Supreme Court of Rhode Island considered whether to apply the “discovery rule” to toll the ten year statute of limitations in R.I. Laws § 9-1-13(a)...more
Shareholder Derivative Lawsuit Aungst v. Light, 9th Dist. Summit No. 29349, 2020-Ohio-3347 In this appeal, the Ninth Appellate District affirmed the trial court’s decision, finding that when a shareholder’s derivative...more
Not so long ago, federal courts began to hold that a federal statute of limitations did not run until the plaintiff knew or reasonably should have known of his or her claim. This is commonly called the “discovery rule.” The...more
In most states for certain claims, the statute of limitations is tempered by the "discovery rule," under which the limitations period does not start until the claimant knew or should have known of its claim against the...more
In Melton v. Waddell, a sister sued her brother for breach of fiduciary duty for misapplying funds in a joint account and not properly allocating revenues from real estate that they owned as tenants in common. No....more
In Rotkiske v. Klemm, the Supreme Court has the opportunity to do what many plaintiffs’ attorneys have dreamed of for years: effectively expand the FDCPA’s one-year statute of limitations by applying the “discovery rule” to...more
The FDCPA requires that any lawsuit must be brought, if at all, “within one year from the date on which the violation” of the act occurs. 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d). The US Supreme Court will hear argument this month in Rotkiske v....more
In Sanders v. Hathaway, the decedent’s estate’s representative sued her sister for various claims arising from the decedent’s beneficiary designation changes, deed transfers, and accounts payable on death changes that...more
Recently, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals considered the three-year statute of limitations provisions of the Defend Trade Secret Act (DTSA) and Iowa Trade Secrets Act (UTSA). In the underlying district court action, CMI...more
We are keeping an eye on Rotkiske v. Klemm, which is currently pending at the U.S. Supreme Court. This case will likely resolve a circuit split on whether the “discovery rule” applies to toll the one-year statute of...more