TRO vs Preliminary Injunction

TRO v. Preliminary Injunction. “I won’t hear your TRO without some notice to the other side” – a phrase often heard by trial lawyers practicing in injunction law, but completely at odds with the very purpose of Ohio Civil Rule 65(A). In this business litigation update, Faruki Ireland & Cox’s Dan Donnellon, author of the book Injunctions and Restraining Orders in Ohio (Anderson 1992), discusses the important distinction between a TRO hearing which is only conducted ex parte and without notice to the opponent, and a preliminary injunction, which is the only way for the court to proceed if the opponent is given notice of the relief sought.

Posted by Daniel Donnellon
Business Litigation
March 25, 2014

Best Amicus Brief Ever?

To paraphrase an ad campaign for the 80s teen comedy film “Sixteen Candles,” if you read only one Supreme Court amicus brief, read this one, too.

In what some are calling the best amicus brief ever (examples here and here) libertarian think tank the Cato Institute and renowned satirist and writer (and Toledo, Ohio native) P.J. O’Rourke have teamed up  on an irreverently-written and entertaining, yet devastatingly accurate, amicus brief (direct link here) in defense of First Amendment free speech rights.

The brief urges the Court to overturn, in the case Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus, a blatantly unconstitutional Ohio statute that makes it a crime “to disseminate a false statement concerning a candidate, either knowing the same to be false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false.”  Ohio Revised Code section 3517.21(B)(10).  The case came about when an anti-abortion group sought to aggressively criticize (via billboards) a Congressman’s vote for Obamacare as a vote for taxpayer-funded abortion; the Congressman, who was trying in his re-election efforts to portray himself as pro-life, complained to the Ohio Election Commission, invoking the statute quoted above in an effort to suppress his critics.

»» Read More

Posted by Don Burton
Business Litigation
March 18, 2014

Telephonic Rule 16 Case Management Conferences

In this Business Litigation Update, Faruki Ireland & Cox asks for your input on the subject of whether the convenience and expense saving of conducting Rule 16 Case Management Conferences telephonically is worth the price.  Dan Donnellon discusses the trade-offs, and invites your comments. Send them via email to Dan Donnellon at ddonnellon@ficlaw.com.

Posted by Daniel Donnellon
Business Litigation
February 6, 2014

Next Page »