§Why CasetextPricing

J&J Sports Productions Inc v. Mandell Family Ventures, LLC et al

RESPONSE

26 Cited authorities

  1. Allen v. McCurry

    449 U.S. 90 (1980)   Cited 5,769 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that under res judicata, parties may not "relitigat[e] issues that were or could have been raised" in a prior action

  2. Agency Holding Corp. v. Malley-Duff Assocs

    483 U.S. 143 (1987)   Cited 1,185 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that civil RICO actions are subject to a four-year statute of limitations

  3. Graham Cty. Soil Water Con. v. U.S. ex Rel. Wilson

    545 U.S. 409 (2005)   Cited 314 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in assessing timeliness of a FCA retaliation claim, courts should borrow the most closely analogous state limitations period

  4. Directv, Inc. v. Webb

    545 F.3d 837 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 255 times
    Noting the statutory-damages provision "suggests" that each signal interception does not constitute a separate violation because it "contemplat[es] a single violation ... over many days"

  5. Kingvision Pay-Per-View Ltd. v. Lake Alice Bar

    168 F.3d 347 (9th Cir. 1999)   Cited 300 times
    Holding that defendants' conduct was culpable because they ignored the summons and complaint despite "frequent chats" with their lawyers during the period for answer and then filed affidavits falsely claiming they had not been served

  6. United States v. Norris

    88 F.3d 462 (7th Cir. 1996)   Cited 230 times
    Holding that § 605 does not apply to transmissions over a cable system even if those transmissions were previously transmitted by radio

  7. TKR Cable Co. v. Cable City Corp.

    267 F.3d 196 (3d Cir. 2001)   Cited 170 times
    Holding that "a cable television descrambler does not facilitate the interception of `communications by radio' and therefore the statutory damages available under § 605 do not apply here."

  8. Prostar v. Massachi

    239 F.3d 669 (5th Cir. 2001)   Cited 119 times
    Holding that violations of 47 U.S.C. §§ 553 and 605 are subject to a three-year statute of limitations period

  9. Hicks v. Quaker Oats Co.

    662 F.2d 1158 (5th Cir. 1982)   Cited 115 times
    Holding that the second Restatement rule is "especially appropriate in the case of offensive collateral estoppel, where the problems of assuring a rigorous determination of all grounds of decision are magnified"

  10. Kingvision Pay-Per-View v. 898 Belmont Inc.

    366 F.3d 217 (3d Cir. 2004)   Cited 43 times
    Holding that uniformity is "used to characterize the claim for which a statute of limitations period is then to be applied"

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 329,613 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Section 605 - Unauthorized publication or use of communications

    47 U.S.C. § 605   Cited 3,650 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Granting broad discretion to courts in the award of statutory damages

  13. Rule 602 - Need for Personal Knowledge

    Fed. R. Evid. 602   Cited 3,520 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Stating that " witness may testify only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter"

  14. Section 553 - Unauthorized reception of cable service

    47 U.S.C. § 553   Cited 2,228 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Providing for a statutory damages range between $250 and $10,000

  15. Section 16.003 - Two-Year Limitations Period

    Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 16.003   Cited 2,095 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Providing a two-year limitations period for personal injury actions

  16. Section 11 - Powers of Federal Communications Commission

    47 U.S.C. § 11

    If any railroad or telegraph company referred to in section 9 of this title, or company operating such railroad or telegraph line shall refuse or fail, in whole or in part, to maintain, and operate a telegraph line as provided herein, for the use of the Government or the public, for commercial and other purposes, without discrimination, or shall refuse or fail to make or continue such arrangements for the interchange of business with any connecting telegraph company, then any person, company, corporation