Barnes' Lawsuit Against Cellino Women’s Firm Gets Dismissed
The law firm Cellino & Cellino beat Stephen Barnes' challenge to its use of half of his famed law firm's name, but Barnes could sue again.
August 06, 2019 at 12:24 PM
3 minute read
A law firm started by the wife and daughters of injury lawyer Ross Cellino has escaped a legal challenge brought by his law partner Stephen Barnes over the use of the Cellino name.
A federal judge in Rochester on Monday refused to bar Anna Marie Cellino and daughters Jeanna and Annmarie from using the name Cellino & Cellino, which they have since abandoned. The judge dismissed Barnes’ suit.
Because he is only a 50% shareholder of Cellino & Barnes, which holds trademarks on its name and phone number that Cellino & Cellino had allegedly infringed, Barnes lacked standing to sue, wrote U.S. District Judge Elizabeth Wolford of the Western District of New York. She said he should have sought approval from Ross Cellino, or at least from the state judge currently weighing the proposed dissolution of Cellino & Barnes, before suing.
“Justice [Deborah] Chimes, as the judge presiding over the dissolution proceeding, could have ordered such action to be taken, effectively overruling Ross Cellino’s objections,” Wolford wrote. “However, it is undisputed that she was never given the opportunity to do so.”
Anna Marie Cellino and daughters Jeanna and Annmarie founded their law firm in April 2019 under the name Cellino & Cellino.
After Barnes sued the law firm in early June for trademark infringement, Anna Marie Cellino said in court papers filed that month that she changed the firm’s name to The Law Offices of Anna Marie Cellino and changed her firm’s phone number from 716-888-2020 to 716-333-2020 to less resemble the 800-888-8888 and 716-854-2020 numbers that have been associated with Cellino & Barnes. The Cellino women had argued that the suit was therefore moot, but Wolford said she didn’t have to reach that argument.
Wolford’s decision Monday left the door open for Barnes to seek permission from Justice Deborah Chimes to file a similar suit again. Christopher Berloth, a lawyer at Buffalo-based Duke, Holzman, Photiadis & Gresens who represents Barnes, said he and his team still take issue with the conduct of the new law firm and were weighing their next steps.
“Given that the decision did not address the merits of the trademark infringement and unfair competition claims, we remain resolute that the defendant law firm continues to market itself in a blatant attempt to palm off Cellino & Barnes P.C.’s goodwill and unprecedented success,” he wrote in an email. “We will continue to pursue the courses of action that are in the best interest of C&B.”
Jeanna Cellino hailed the decision in a statement. “We are obviously pleased with the court’s position,” she said. “We also believe because we voluntarily changed our firm’s name, phone number and advertising, so there is no possibility of confusion with any other law firm, this whole effort is baseless. Our firm is prospering, and we are concentrating on our clients.”
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 AllEuropean, US Litigation Funding Experts Look for Commonalities at NYU Event
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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