Photo of Jason Meade

Jason Meade focuses his practice on commercial litigation. He has represented public corporations and financial institutions in complex civil disputes in state and federal courts, and in government and internal investigations.

On Monday, the New York State Board of Elections voted to cancel New York’s democratic presidential primary, which it had originally postponed from April due to the COVID-19 pandemic.  In a complaint filed Tuesday, former presidential candidate Andrew Yang and a group of candidates running to become pledged delegates at the Democratic National Convention sued the Board of Elections to block the move.

Plaintiffs argue that the cancellation would disenfranchise millions of voters, suppress turnout in down-ballot races to the detriment of challengers, deny Yang the opportunity to accumulate delegates and influence at the convention, and establish a precedent that President Trump could use to cancel the November 2020 election.  Plaintiffs allege violations of the right to vote and of procedural due process and are seeking emergency relief.

Plaintiffs argue that the primary can safely proceed if voters are simply allowed to vote by mail, and that it is “cancelling democracy” to simply shut down the primary:
Continue Reading Andrew Yang Sues New York State Board of Elections for Canceling Democratic Primary

On Friday, Judge Rakoff dismissed a class action complaint in which a fantasy sports contestant alleged that Major League Baseball’s recent cheating scandals fatally compromised the fairness of fantasy contests promoted by the league. (Click here for previous coverage.) Although the conduct “broke the hearts of all true baseball fans,” Judge Rakoff held that the league did not owe fantasy baseball participants any duty of disclosure or care that could support claims for fraud or negligence, and that the plaintiff’s consumer protection and unjust enrichment claims were “too attenuated to support liability.”  The opinion begins:
Continue Reading Judge Rakoff: MLB Broke the Hearts of All True Baseball Fans, But Did Not Break the Law

In a class action lawsuit filed Thursday, a fantasy sports contestant alleged that the cheating scandals that have recently engulfed Major League Baseball fatally compromised the fairness of fantasy contests promoted by the league.  The complaint alleges that contestants would not “have wagered on fantasy baseball contests if they had known that the players’ performance statistics on which their wagers were based were not honest.”
Continue Reading Class Action Alleges MLB Cheating Scandal Tainted Fantasy League

New York regularly places voters on inactive status if it believes that the voter has moved, but it does not provide the names of these inactive voters to poll workers at polling locations.  In an opinion last week, Judge Nathan ruled, following a bench trial, that the refusal to maintain the inactive list at polling locations violates the the Equal Protection Clause.

Judge Nathan found that the refusal to provide the inactive list served no legitimate state interest.  The State argued that not having the inactive list would ensure that people vote in the location in which they were registered, but, as Judge Nathan concluded, failed to explain how the practice would “actually advance” that interest.  The State claimed that the practice increased efficiency at the polls, but Judge Nathan found that the practice actually created delays which produced ripple effects that burdened all voters.Continue Reading Judge Nathan: Refusal to Provide List of Inactive Voters at Polling Locations Serves No Legitimate State Interest

Friday morning, the Second Circuit vacated the district court’s dismissal of a suit challenging President Trump’s business dealings under the Foreign and Domestic Emoluments Clauses of the U.S. Constitution.  (See our prior coverage here.)  In December 2017, Judge Daniels found that Plaintiffs had failed the causation and redressability prongs of the Article III standing inquiry, and lacked prudential standing because they fell outside the “zone of interests” that the Emoluments Clauses were intended to protect.

In a 2-1 decision, the Second Circuit held that Plaintiffs had satisfied the requirements for standing:
Continue Reading Second Circuit Revives Emoluments Case Against President Trump, Creating Circuit Split

Last week, seven major publishers filed a lawsuit claiming that a new captioning service offered by audiobook company Audible, Inc. violates copyright law.  The “Audible Captions” feature transcribes the narration from the audiobook and displays the text on-screen, so that listeners-slash-readers can follow along in real time.  Although previous Audible offerings have allowed users to

On Thursday, Judge Oetken dismissed a Major League Baseball umpire’s discrimination claims under the Ohio Civil Rights Act, holding that the plaintiff could not seek relief under the conflicting laws of two different states based on a single course of employer conduct.  The plaintiff alleged that the MLB discriminated against him on the basis of race and brought claims under Ohio and New York law.

Plaintiff argued that the “transitory nature” of his job meant that he is discriminated against in every state in which he works.  However, because plaintiff challenged the same acts under both laws, Judge Oetken applied a choice of law analysis and found that the two state laws conflicted because Ohio permits punitive damages while New York does not.   Judge Oetken held that New York had a greater interest in the litigation and dismissed the Ohio claims:
Continue Reading Judge Oetken: MLB Umpire Can’t Bring Bias Claims Under Conflicting State Laws

In an opinion Tuesday, Judge Furman ruled that the complaint in an “international saga” of fraud in the art world must be filed publicly and without redactions, even though it contained sensitive information about transactions facilitated by the international auction house Sotheby’s.

Plaintiffs hired an art dealer to assist in purchasing a world-class art collection, and the dealer allegedly defrauded them of approximately $1 billion by purchasing the artworks himself and re-selling them to plaintiffs at inflated prices.  Plaintiffs claim that Sotheyby’s aided and abetted the fraud.  Sotheby’s sought to keep certain portions of the complaint under seal, but Judge Furman held that confidentiality concerns were insufficient because the information at issue went to the very heart of the case:
Continue Reading Judge Furman: Sensitive Pricing Information Can’t Be Sealed Where It Goes to the “Heart of the Litigation”