In an opinion Tuesday, Judge Carter issued an injunction against New York’s newly-enacted online hate speech law (see our prior coverage here).
The law would require social media platforms to develop policies for addressing, and responding to user complaints about, “hateful conduct.” Judge Carter found that, in doing so, the law impermissibly compelled the challengers — Rumble and other “pro-free speech” online platforms — to engage in speech with which they disagreed:
A jury returned a verdict yesterday of approximately $130,000 against Mason Rothschild, the creator of a series of non-fungible tokens, or NFTs, associated with digital images of Hermés’s “Birkin” handbags covered in fake fur (see our prior coverage here).
Rothschild argued that the NFTs were protected artistic expression under the First Amendment. Judge Rakoff denied both sides summary judgment as to that and other issues, and ultimately instructed the jury that the First Amendment question turned on whether Rothchild was intentionally trying to confuse customers and thereby capitalize on Hermés famous brand, or instead created the project for artistic reasons:
Continue Reading Jury: “MetaBirkins” NFTs Violate Trademark Rights of Handbag Maker Hermés
Judge McMahon issued a written Order on Friday, answering the parties’ questions ahead of a bench trial in an ERISA case, and, in doing so, offered helpful guidance as to her practices in bench trials.
First, she was clear she does not want opening statements, and perhaps not even closing statements:
Continue Reading Judge McMahon Ahead of Bench Trial: “Last Thing I Need Is Opening Statements”
Judge Carter will hold a preliminary injunction hearing next week in a case challenging, on First Amendment grounds, a new New York law (N.Y. Gen. Bus. L. § 394-ccc) that requires social media platforms to develop policies for addressing, and for responding to user complaints about, “hateful conduct.”
The challengers are operators of online platforms who argue that they should not be forced to police what the state vaguely defines as “hateful” conduct. Merely having to separately define what is “hateful” conduct, and provide special treatment to users who complain about conduct meeting that definition, amounts to an endorsement of the State’s views, according to the challengers:
In an opinion yesterday, Judge Liman granted — albeit with clear reluctance — the government’s motion to dismiss a case brought by former Trump attorney Michael Cohen against various government offices who allegedly retaliated against him for planning to publish a book critical of former President Trump.
Cohen was placed on furlough during his prison sentence, but then suddenly, while negotiating the terms of a transition to home confinement with probation officials, was remanded to prison.
In July 2020, Judge Hellerstein granted Cohen release via an Order stating:
The Court finds that Respondents’ purpose in transferring Cohen from release on furlough and home confinement back to custody was retaliatory in response to Cohen desiring to exercise his First Amendment rights to publish a book critical of the President and to discuss the book on social media.
In the case before Judge Liman, Cohen was suing for damages, primarily by asserting so-called Bivens claims against the federal government. Judge Liman found that the Supreme Court’s more recent interpretations of Bivens — essentially that no Bivens claim can proceed if by statute there is any other remedy, no matter how small — barred Cohen’s lawsuit.
But Judge Liman noted that the result worked a form of “violence” to Cohen’s constitutional rights:
In an opinion Friday, Judge Abrams approved an SEC settlement, but wrote that she would “not do so silently,” because she found highly “troubling” the SEC’s standard, non-negotiable provision requiring that the defendant not make “any public statement denying, directly or indirectly, any allegation in the complaint or creating the impression that the complaint is without factual basis”:
Continue Reading Judge Abrams Harshly Criticizes SEC’s “Lifetime Gag” Settlement Requirement
In an Order Monday, Judge McMahon chided a group of defendants for “asking for permission to file almost everything in support of their motion for summary judgment and motions to exclude testimony of plaintiff’s various experts under seal.”
Referring to the required confidentiality stipulation “addendum” in her Individual Practices — which states “that confidentiality stipulations are abused by parties and that much material that is not truly confidential is designated as such” — Judge McMahon directed the defendants to instead evaluate confidentiality with a more careful, line-by-line approach:
Continue Reading Judge McMahon: “Most” Discovery Designated Confidential is Not; Oral Argument on Summary Judgment “Rarely” Necessary
In an endorsement today, Judge Schofield declined to postpose a major antitrust trial, despite lead counsel for a bank testing positive for COVID, given that counsel’s firm had several other lawyers available. The endorsement, in full, reads:
It is unfortunate that defense counsel has tested positive for COVID, but the circumstances warrant proceeding with the
In an opinion last week, the Second Circuit, reversing a decision by Judge Furman (covered here), held that Citibank could sue to recoup almost $500 million that it had sent, in error, to certain lenders of a struggling borrower, Revlon.
Citibank was the administrative agent for the loans, and, based on a technical error, wired the full principal balance (nearly $900 million) before the maturity date. Judge Furman applied the “discharge for value” defense to conclude that even a mistaken payment need not be returned where it pertains to a valid debt.
The Second Circuit concluded, however, that the defense is inapplicable so long as the recipient is on “inquiry notice” of the mistake. Inquiry notice was shown by the fact that there was no prior notice of any loan repayment, as the transaction documents required, and by the fact that Revlon was not expected to have the funds to repay:
Continue Reading Second Circuit: Citibank Can Recoup $500 Million Accidental Debt Repayment
The announcement is here.