|

At least one Trump supporter is, not only well aware of the issues that face minorities in this country, but is actively fighting to support those minorities.

His target? Fox News.

Because Fox News has been such a strong supporter of Trump, you’d think an attorney who donated $40,000 to Trump’s campaign and voted for him in both the primary and general elections would also support Fox News, but that’s not the case for attorney Douglas Wigdor.

Wigdor started filing lawsuits against Fox News late last year after a reporter for Fox 5, Lidija Ujkic, sought him out after having heard about a case he had settled in which he had argued on behalf of a woman who claimed her pregnancy had led to her demotion at Goldman Sachs. Ujkic’s claims against Fox were similar.

Wigdor took Ujkic’s case, and a few months later, took on another, this time alleging racial bias. Eleven new plaintiffs ended up joining that case in the following month, including Kelly Wright, the only black man to work as a news anchor on the conservative news channel.

That apparently opened the floodgates, as Wigdor followed it up by suing the media giant two more times that month, three times the following month, once in July, once in August and again in September. Continue reading ›

|

A trademark infringement suit recently filed in Chicago federal court shows how it doesn’t pay to have the same initials as a reality TV queen. Kim Kardashian West has won the right to have the case against her newly launched cosmetics company transferred from Illinois to her home base of California.

A Danish makeup artist and cosmetics producer is accusing Kardashian West and her company, Kimsaprincess Inc., of promoting a similar-sounding product line that could potentially get consumers confused between the two brands. Kirsten Kjaer Weiss, who brands her own products with her name and initials, KW, filed the trademark suit in the Northern District of Illinois, claiming that Kardashian West’s KKW brand sounds too much like hers.

U.S. District Judge Robert M. Dow Jr. ruled that even though the suit was properly brought in Illinois because both companies’ products are sold in the Chicago area, the Central District of California is a more appropriate venue because that is where Kimsaprincess is based, and where key witnesses for the company are subject to jurisdiction. Both KW and KKW products are also sold in California. Weiss’s line is sold in retail stores, while Kardashian’s are sold only online.

Weiss launched her organic cosmetics and skincare line in 2010, through Kjaer Weiss LLC, which is based in New York. She had argued for the Southern District of New York as an alternate venue to Illinois. Continue reading ›

|

Celebrities who were superstars in life are often bigger moneymakers in death, their estates raking in huge revenues from posthumous sales of their music, memorabilia, or commercial use of their image. One need look no further than the lucrative afterlife of Elvis Presley and Michael Jackson.

Professional sports icons are no different. Heavyweight boxing legend Muhammad Ali has been gone for over a year now, but his name and image are still worth big bucks to advertisers. Now the company he formed during his lifetime to manage the commercial use of his persona is suing Fox Broadcasting Co. for $30 million for unauthorized use of the late champion’s identity in a pre-Super Bowl promotional ad in February 2017.

Muhammad Ali Enterprises LLC (MAE) filed the complaint Oct. 10 in federal district court in Illinois, charging that Fox used Ali’s name and likeness as the centerpiece of its three-minute promotional spot. The ad depicts Ali along with living NFL legends including Joe Montana and Joe Namath and makes repeated reference to Ali’s “The Greatest” title.

According to the complaint, the video begins with a narrator saying, “Walk with me as I confront greatness” while the viewer sees the back of a boxer representing Ali and wearing a robe that says “The Greatest. The Lip.” The viewer sees actual film footage of Ali and hears Ali shouting, “I am the Greatest!” The narrator again says, “Walk with me.  I can show you what it means to be the greatest.” Continue reading ›

|

Although the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) gives consumers the right to claim thousands of dollars in punitive damages for each illegal phone call made to their cell phones, there are valid reasons for plaintiffs to seek a settlement that pays only a fraction of their eligible damages.

In a recent proposed class action consumer lawsuit against Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, the parties have agreed to a financial settlement of $17.5 million to cover the claims of more than 1.6 million customers. Attorneys representing the class of plaintiffs have said they will request reimbursement for up to $100,000 of their actual expenses, fees of no more than one third of the total settlement fund ($5.8 million), and an incentive award of $25,000 for each of the three named plaintiffs who came forward to file the TCPA lawsuit.

After all that, each plaintiff will receive anywhere from $55 to $90, depending on their individual claims. Any funds that are left over after all payments have been made will go to the National Consumer Law Center and the Public Justice Foundation. None of the funds will revert back to Ocwen, as is sometimes the case in class action settlements. Continue reading ›

|

While colleges give promising athletes a free education in exchange for playing on the school’s sports teams, colleges and universities earn it all back and much more, not just through ticket sales and advertising space at games, but other promotional opportunities featuring their student athletes. With schools raking in millions of dollars that the athletes never get to see, many students are left wondering just what a college athlete’s image is worth, and how much (if any) of a claim those athletes have to their own images.

This issue has been addressed most recently in a lawsuit against Ohio State University, which named Honda and IMG Worldwide, Inc. as co-defendants. The lawsuit was filed in federal court by Chris Spielman, a former linebacker for Ohio State, after his image, along with images of other former Ohio State athletes, appeared on a series of banners that were sponsored by Honda and displayed around Ohio Stadium.

The series of banners is just one of several such programs listed by the lawsuit, which accuses Ohio State, Honda, and IMG of unjustly monopolizing the images of former student athletes for profit. The lawsuit is seeking an end to the marketing program, as well as $75,000 in compensation for the former Ohio State athletes whose images appeared in the program. Although that dollar amount is standard for these kinds of claims, the complaint points out that Ohio State is currently making millions of dollars through merchandising programs like the banners that were displayed around the stadium.

In September, the university filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that the case hasn’t met the requirement for this type of antitrust lawsuit, and that federal courts don’t have jurisdiction over this case. Continue reading ›

|

An interesting recent employment law case in the United Kingdom illustrates why it is crucial for businesses to carefully draft non-compete agreements. In England as in the United States former employees can use overbroad wording to invalidate the entire covenant and circumvent otherwise valid provisions.

Mary-Caroline T. was an executive search agent and partner at Egon Zehnder Ltd. in the U.K., eventually rising to become co-global head of the financial services group. Her employment agreement provided that she not be “engaged, concerned with or interested in” a competing business of a similar nature for six months following separation from the company. The restriction was not limited geographically. Continue reading ›

|

Our previous blog post, we discussed the ramifications of posting online reviews anonymously. In that case, a state appeals court ruled that in order to enforce a subpoena for the identities of former employees who had commented anonymously on the workplace review site, the plaintiff must prove the falsity of the comments and suffer a financial loss. A similar issue was revisited by the courts in a situation where alleged defamatory remarks were made and photos in support of remarks were also retrieved by trespass onto the property by an incident of various online reviews and the defendant happened to be a landlord.

More specifically, the decision pertaining to this incident happened to be a real estate entrepreneur with properties in three different states  and claimed that Facebook pages and Twitter accounts, as well as, flyers distributed near his home, accused him of being a “greedy slumlord,” who subjected his tenants and neighborhoods to bad conditions. The defendants were sued because it hosted the web sites and possessed real estate interests which could potentially damage his business. The complaint alleged diversity jurisdiction.

Accordingly, plaintiff proceeded to file an ex parte motion for early discovery seeking to identify his critics. In these motions, any relevant section of law which could apply or the basis for his assertion of diversity jurisdiction was never mentioned. The other party wanted to move to dismiss and seek sanctions for frivolous litigation. It had to then be pointed out to the trial judge that the lawsuit pending before him lacked any jurisdiction, and was not a proper basis for the issuance of federal court subpoenas for that reason. Continue reading ›

|

It may be a first when class-action consumer litigation requires a Seventh Circuit panel to describe the step-by-step process of creating a Subway sandwich in a published opinion.

But that’s indeed what the court did in its recent ruling dismissing a class-action suit against the Subway fast-food chain; ham, provolone, pepper jack and all.

It all started in 2013 when an Australian teenager posted a photograph of his Subway “Footlong” sandwich next to a tape measure on his Facebook page. The sandwich measured only 11 inches. The post went viral and Subway customers in the U.S. began measuring their own sandwiches, and it was only a matter of time before the plaintiffs’ bar got in on the action.

Plaintiffs’ lawyers sued Subway, seeking damages and injunctive relief under state consumer-protection laws. The different cases were consolidated in the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

Subway’s defense was that because of deviations in the baking process, some rolls would inevitably shrink to under 12 inches, but all customers still received the same quantity of ingredients and most customers still got to enjoy a foot-long sandwich. Continue reading ›

|

Posting online has become a norm in this tech savvy world that we live in.  For greater transparency in a review, some may choose to post anonymously in fear of ramifications if their name disclosure came about.  Just recently, the ability of an employer being able to find out which employee employer-rated an employer unfairly or inaccurately was assessed by the Courts. This is since some would argue that surely the law protects against outrageous false statements that harm an employer’s ability to recruit talent.  That is why a California appeals court recently ruled that businesses have to prove online comments are false and financially harmful before they can unmask anonymous critics via subpoenas.  It can thus be seen that the decision has First Amendment implications which safeguard people’s right to free speech and this was valued as being the greater consideration.

A suit under the anonymous posting was brought forwards for libel and for violating California law regarding online impersonation.  A request was placed for assistance from the courts in an ability to be able to retrieve the identity of the postings. Initially, the trial court turned the employer down and this was again examined by a California Court of Appeal.Subsequently, the lengthy opinion was issued and a conclusion was drawn indicating that to force a disclosure of the names, a plaintiff must state a legally sufficient cause of action comprising of the following elements of that cause of action:  (1) the courts determining these issues must ensure that reasonable efforts are made to notify the unknown defendants so they can respond and (2) the plaintiff’s pleading must specifically note the exact statements alleged to constitute defamation. Continue reading ›

|

An engineer for vehicles was sentenced to 40 months imprisonment and will pay a $200,000 fine for emissions-cheating deception after cooperating with U.S. prosecutors in their criminal investigation of a conspiracy to defraud government officials and customers.

A pleading of being charged with one count of conspiring to defraud the U.S., committing wire fraud and violating the Clean Air Act for his role in helping vehicles evade emissions requirements with diesel-powered vehicles. As a result, the foreign national agreed to be removed from the U.S. following the prison term, according to prosecutors. The engineer initially moved to and settled in the U.S. to help launch diesel-powered vehicles and handle certification, testing, and warranty issues, prosecutors said.

Furthermore, the sentence imposed by the judge exceeded prosecutors’ recommendation. The initial request was that the accused receive three years imprisonment and a $20,000 fine. It was a stiffer sentence than expected, as the engineer only helped to create software that controlled exhaust emissions. The tough sentence sends a message that employees can and should be held accountable for misdeeds they commit for their corporate employers. Many individuals have not been held responsible for corporate misconduct and this is one of those rare cases; a stunning fraud on the American consumer, being a very serious and troubling crime against our economic system. Such incidences give rise to a reduced trust in corporate America and undermine the economy. As a result, the ruling sends a strong message even though he was not “mastermind” and never benefited financially from its development of devices that masked the high levels of harmful emissions. Continue reading ›

Contact Information
Chicago Office
19 S LaSalle St #702
Chicago, IL 60603
Phone: 630-333-0333
Mailing Address
17W220 22nd St #410
Oakbrook Terrace, IL 60181
Phone: 630-333-0333 Please direct all mail correspondence to our Oakbrook Terrace address office.
Highland Park Office
189 Whistler Rd
Highland Park, IL 60035
Phone: 630-710-4990
We accept the following credit cards
Credit Cards Accepted
We accept payment via Venmo at: @L-A-LAW
Phone: 603-333-0333
Visit our site: chicagobusinesslawfirm.com

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2025, DiTommaso Lubin, PC
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design