Daily Dicta: How NOT to Litigate During a Pandemic
"The filing calls to mind the sage words of Elihu Root: 'About half of the practice of a decent lawyer is telling would-be clients that they are damned fools and should stop.'"
March 23, 2020 at 10:57 PM
5 minute read
Look, I get it—everyone wants to be a zealous advocate, to protect your client, to push for the maximum remedies available.
But at this moment in time, some perspective is in order. As in, if your case involves stopping the sale counterfeit unicorn products on the internet, sorry, that's not an emergency. You need to chill out.
That was the message from U.S. District Judge Steven Seeger, who was a partner at Kirkland & Ellis before he was confirmed to a seat in the Northern District of Illinois in September.
Last week, Seeger penned a withering decision denying a request for a temporary restraining order that was filed by Michael A. Hierl, a partner at Hughes Socol PIers Resnick & Dym in Chicago.
Hierl, who did not respond to a request for comment, represents Art Ask Agency, the exclusive licensee for the fantasy art of British artist Anne Stokes, who is popular among the Dungeons and Dragons crowd.
On March 18, he asked the court for an emergency TRO, ex parte asset freeze and expedited discovery involving a slew of third parties including Amazon, Visa, PayPal, Western Union, Facebook and Google.
"Without entry of the requested emergency relief, the sale of infringing products will continue unabated. Therefore, entry of an emergency ex parte order is necessary to protect plaintiff's rights, to prevent further harm to plaintiff and the consuming public, and to preserve the status quo," Hierl wrote.
Seeger was … not persuaded.
His order—just over two pages long—kicks off with a less-than-reverent description of the products at issue: "One example is a puzzle of an elf-like creature embracing the head of a unicorn on a beach. Another is a hand purse with a large purple heart, filled with the interlocking heads of two amorous-looking unicorns. There are phone cases featuring elves and unicorns, and a unicorn running beneath a castle lit by a full moon."
"Meanwhile," the judge continued in what was surely a deliberately jarring contrast, "the world is in the midst of a global pandemic. The president has declared a national emergency. The governor has issued a state-wide health emergency. As things stand, the government has forced all restaurants and bars in Chicago to shut their doors, and the schools are closed, too. The government has encouraged everyone to stay home, to keep infections to a minimum and help contain the fast-developing public health emergency."
Given these circumstances, Seeger scheduled the TRO hearing a few weeks out "to protect the health and safety of our community, including counsel and this court's staff. Waiting a few weeks seemed prudent."
Besides, he noted, "Plaintiff has not demonstrated that it will suffer an irreparable injury from waiting a few weeks. At worst, defendants might sell a few more counterfeit products in the meantime. But plaintiff makes no showing about the anticipated loss of sales. One wonders if the fake fantasy products are experiencing brisk sales at the moment."
(Pandemic must-haves: Toilet paper, hand sanitizer, N95 masks … and unicorn purses?)
Even a telephonic hearing would consume thinly-stretched court resources, Seeger wrote.
Moreover, he wrote in a separate minute entry, the plaintiff "proposes a bloated order that imposes extraordinary demands on third parties, including a wide array of technology companies and financial institutions. Plaintiff's proposed order would require immediate action, in a matter of days, from firms that have nothing to do with this case."
"In the meantime," he continued, "the country is in the midst of a crisis from the coronavirus, and it is not a good time to put significant demands on innocent third parties. … All of them undoubtedly have (more) pressing matters on their plates right now."
What truly seemed to irritate the judge wasn't the initial TRO request—it was that Hierl didn't take no for an answer, claiming that his client "will suffer an 'irreparable injury' if this court does not hold a hearing this week and immediately put a stop to the infringing unicorns and the knock-off elves," Seeger wrote.
After Seeger set the hearing schedule, Hierl filed a motion for reconsideration. But he didn't stop there. "Thirty minutes ago, this court learned that plaintiff filed yet another emergency motion," Seeger wrote, sounding more than a little peeved. "They teed it up in front of the designated emergency judge, and thus consumed the attention of the chief judge."
Bad move.
"The filing calls to mind the sage words of Elihu Root: 'About half of the practice of a decent lawyer is telling would-be clients that they are damned fools and should stop,'" Seeger wrote. "If there's ever a time when emergency motions should be limited to genuine emergencies, now's the time."
"To put it bluntly," he added in the minute entry, "Plaintiff's proposed order seems insensitive to others in the current environment. Simply put, trademark infringement is an important consideration, but so is the strain that the rest of country is facing, too. It is important to keep in perspective the costs and benefits of forcing everyone to drop what they're doing to stop the sale of knock-off unicorn products, in the midst of a pandemic."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLitigators of the (Past) Week: Tackling a $4.7 Billion Verdict Post-Trial for the NFL in 'Sunday Ticket' Antitrust Litigation
Take-Two's Pete Welch on 'Getting the Best Results While Getting in the Way the Least'
Litigators of the Week: Kirkland Beats Videogame Copyright Claim From Lebron James' Tattoo Artist
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250