Devil Is In The Details As Second Circuit Visits UConn
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit visited the University of Connecticut School of Law on Monday to hear oral arguments in five pending cases, including two that originated in Connecticut.
The three-judge panel includes Jose Cabranes, Susan Carney, and the Christopher Droney.
The judges began hearing arguments starting at 10 a.m. on Monday, Jan. 27, in the William F. Starr Hall Reading Room at the law school's Hartford campus.
Cases on the docet include:
GMA Accessories Inc. v. Electric Wonderland Inc.: This appeal focuses on the scope of the "use in commerce" requirement for trademark infringement under the Lanham Act, as well as on whether proof of bad faith and not simple liability is necessary for the collection of monetary damages.
Kristopher Balentine v. Thomas Temblay, et al: This appeal focuses on whether inclusion upon a state online sex offender registry, given the facts of this case, constitutes a deprivation of a liberty interest and "stigma plus" due process violation as well as on whether claims brought against state actors in their individual capacities are barred by qualified immunity.
Burton T. Fried v. LVI Services Inc., et al: The appellant, a former employee, appeals a grant of summary judgment on the grounds of res judicata for defendants. The appellant alleged that his Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act claims were not fully adjudicated in prior litigation due to late release of jurisdiction from the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities.
United States of America v. Kenneth L. Miller: The district court found the proper venue for the criminal charge of aiding and abetting the removal of a child from the United States to be Vermont under the high seas venue statute, 18 U.S.C. §3238, and the defendant appealed.
Amey Goins v. Bridgeport Hospital, et al and Marylyn Cocia: Appellant Amey Goins appeals from a grant of summary judgment to defendants Bridgeport Hospital and Marylyn Coscia, her former supervisor, on her claims of hostile work environment, disparate treatment, wrongful termination and retaliation.