In the long-running case between former New York Knicks player Charles Oakley and Madison Square Garden over his removal from a game in 2017 (see our prior posts here), Judge Sullivan (apparently still winding down some of his District Court cases) yesterday granted summary judgment to the defendants.

Judge Sullivan found that the video evidence made clear that no excessive force was used:
Continue Reading Judge Sullivan: Video Evidence Disproves Charles Oakley’s Case Over Ejection from Madison Square Garden

This week, the Second Circuit issued two orders reversing in part the district court’s decision dismissing claims brought by former Knicks player Charles Oakley, all stemming from a 2017 incident at Madison Square Garden where Oakley was forcibly removed from the stands during a Knicks game by the arena’s security (see our previous coverage here).

The Second Circuit concluded that the allegations of excessive force were best left for a jury to decide:
Continue Reading Second Circuit Allows Charles Oakley’s Assault and Battery Claims to Proceed, But Agrees Defamation Claims Should Be Dismissed

Today, Judge Sullivan remanded to New York state court a case against MLB brought by a former Milwaukee Brewers and Cincinnati Reds player Neiman Nix.  The complaint alleged that MLB investigators spread misinformation about Nix’s player training academy and “sports science testing facility” in Florida, and included claims for defamation, tortious interference, and violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

Judge Sullivan dismissed the sole federal claim under the CFAA at the plaintiff’s behest, despite the defendants’ argument that plaintiffs’ position was solely intended to defeat federal jurisdiction.  Judge Sullivan found that while forum manipulation was frowned upon, it did not require the court to exercise its supplemental jurisdiction after all federal claims had been dismissed:
Continue Reading Judge Sullivan: Plaintiff Can Voluntarily Drop Federal Claim to Get Back in State Court

In an opinion last week, Judge Sullivan concluded that the False Claims Act did not allow a “relator” (a private citizen suing on behalf of the government for fraud against the government) who voluntarily dismissed his case to share in the proceeds from a case that the government later filed on its own.

The False Claim Act states that, when a relator brings a claim, the government may choose whether to intervene and take over the case, or may “may elect to pursue its claim through any alternate remedy available,” and in either case the relator should typically share in the recovery.  The relator argued that the government’s separate litigation was an “alternate remedy,” but Judge Sullivan, while acknowledging the issue was one of first impression in the Second Circuit, disagreed:
Continue Reading Judge Sullivan: Qui Tam Plaintiff Who Voluntarily Dismisses Case Cannot Share in Proceeds from Settlement of Later-Filed Government Case