Robbery Suspect Sues Victim Who Shot Him
The Macomb Daily: “A man who was shot and allegedly beaten by party store operators he had just robbed was ordered Monday to post a $10,000 bond in order to continue his lawsuit against them.”
Blog Sued for $22 Million
Above the Law: “For the first time in over three years of operation, Above the Law has been sued. We feel the lawsuit has no merit, but we will not comment further on this ongoing litigation.” See the complaint. Law professor Eugene Volokh takes a dim view of the plaintiff’s case in “Prof. Donald Jones’ Lawsuit Against Above The Law.”
See also “Law Professor Sues Above the Law Blog, Alleging ‘Viciously Racist Series of Rants.”‘
November 4, 2009, update: “Law Prof Dismisses Privacy Suit Against Tabloid Above the Law Blog.”
Another Consumer Says He Was Duped by Froot Loops
Lowering the Bar: “As I wrote this past summer, a number of lawsuits have been filed in California over the past couple of years by people who say they were deceived by certain representations on cereal boxes. Specifically, plaintiffs including Janine Sugawara, Mark McKinniss and Keith Videtto have alleged they were led to believe that “Crunch Berries” and/or “Froot Loops” are made with real fruit even though the “froot” mentioned in the products’ names is obviously fictional.”
I still think this is like claiming emotional distress because you just learned “The Hobbit” isn’t a true story.
The Flying Imams Win and the Rest of Us Lose
The Weekly Standard: “The case of the flying imams who were removed in November 2006 from a USAirways flight in Minneapolis for questioning by law enforcement authorities concluded in the Minnesota federal district court before Judge Ann Montgomery. The parties arrived at a settlement of the case on October 20 in a court-supervised conference. The amounts paid by the defendants remain confidential. The case drew national attention–including that of Congress, which passed a law protecting private citizens who report suspicious activity and law enforcement authorities who act in good faith on the information. The imams had named USAirways passengers who raised concerns about their behavior as John Doe defendants in their original complaint, but later dropped the passengers.”
Court Gives Adware Maker WhenU Green Light
Cnet News: “A federal appeals court overturned a ruling against adware maker WhenU that held it violated the trademarks of vision specialist 1-800-Contacts in the sale and distribution of pop-up advertising. The ruling, delivered Monday by the 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals, reversed an earlier decision that confined WhenU from selling pop-ups triggered by 1-800-Contacts’ trademarks, in violation of the Lanham Act, the U.S. trademark act.”
We hold that, as a matter of law, WhenU does not ‘use’ 1-800’s trademarks within the meaning of the Lanham Act when it includes 1-800’s Web site address in an unpublished directory of terms that trigger delivery of WhenU’s (ads) to computer users,” according to the ruling.