JD Journal » California Supreme Court

Prominent Advertising Attorney Joins Venable’s Los Angeles Office

rebneely — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 08:00:31 +0000

In recent days, Venable LLP announced that Greg Sater, one of the nation’s leading advertising attorneys, joined the firm’s Los Angeles office as a partner in the firm’s Intellectual Property Litigation group.

Sater joins Venable from Rutter Hobbs & Davidoff in Los Angeles. There, he built an intellectual property litigation practice in advertising, marketing, trademark, copyright, publicity right, trade dress, trade secret and other IP issues. In particular, he represents direct response television advertisers, online marketers and other direct-to-consumer marketers and retailers in connection with intellectual property issues, false or deceptive advertising concerns, compliance with state and federal advertising regulations, and business contracts.

Sater has also provided representation to a variety of entertainment industry companies in litigation matters. As well as the multitude of jury trials in which Sater has been involved, Sater has briefed and argued precedent setting cases before the California Supreme Court and other appellate courts.

Jeffrey D. Knowles, head of Venable’s Advertising and Marketing Practice Group was quoted as saying in a press release at the firm’s website: “For more than a decade, Greg has been a colleague, collaborator and friend. Now I am proud to call him my partner. Greg’s creative and talented practice of law will enhance the formidable depth and breadth of Venable’s Advertising practice. In addition, Greg’s current clients will now benefit from the depth of Venable’s resources.”

Doug Emhoff, Los Angeles Managing Partner and also a member of the Advertising Practice Group, was quoted as saying: “I am pleased to welcome Greg to the Los Angeles office. Along with the recent additions of Brett Garner and Dan Silverman, Greg boosts our West Coast presence in the advertising arena and will help service our clients across the United States. We are continuing to grow in LA in several different practice areas, and just last week added, Jan Handzlik, one of the country’s top white collar attorneys.”

Sater earned his law degree from Harvard Law School. His pro bono work has included time spent as a volunteer prosecutor for the City of Los Angeles. There, he obtained guilty verdicts in criminal jury trials involving handguns, domestic violence, and assault and battery. He has also made significant contributions in several public interest lawsuits against the federal government seeking to protect habitats for endangered species on public lands.

Venable’s Advertising and Marketing practice is internationally recognized and respected. Among the many honors it has received, the group recently received the Chambers USA 2011 Award for Excellence in Advertising Law, for the second year in a row. This is an achievement no other law firm has accomplished.

An American Lawyer Global 100 law firm, Venable serves corporate, institutional, governmental, nonprofit and individual clients globally. The firm has headquarters in Washington, DC, and offices in California, Maryland, New York and Virginia.

The firm was founded in Baltimore in 1900, and has over 500 attorneys practicing in more than seventy practice and industry areas, including corporate and business law, complex litigation, intellectual property and regulatory and government affairs.

Supporters of Proposition 8 Argue for Right to Appeal

aostler — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 22:48:41 +0000

California Proposition 8, the ban of same-sex marriage in California, has repeatedly not been defended by state officials. Monday, March 14, supporters of Prop 8 asked the California Supreme Court to let them defend Prop 8 since it was not being defended by the state.

The court announced last month that it would decide if the pending federal appeal of the invalidation of Prop 8 could continue. The proponents argue that all of the work that they have done in creating, defending, and supporting the proposition has created a “personal, particularized interest in the validity of their initiative entitling them to defend the initiative as real parties in interest if it is challenged in court.” They also argue that the entitlement that they have to appeal is taken from state law, and that “…allowing official proponents to intervene to vindicate the People’s interest in successful initiatives when public officials will not do so is necessary to preserve the People’s initiative power…”

The initiative has been undefended again and again by state officials, and an appeals court in California last September held that it is not necessary for them to defend it. If it is ruled by the Supreme Court of California that these proponents are not allowed to defend Prop 8 under state law, then the case will most likely be dismissed by the court of appeals.

The stay that prohibited gay couples from marrying was requested to be lifted earlier this month by Attorney General of California, Kamala Harris. She felt that it was irrational to continue the stay, and that the appeal would not likely succeed. She also feels that laws about sexual orientation should be given a higher standard of review. The stay is still in force as of this writing, and was originally ordered last August after an appeal was being decided on by the court after Prop 8 was overturned last year by a federal judge.

Sirhan Sirhan Denied Parole

joshua — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 17:53:41 +0000

Sirhan Sirhan, the Palestinian Christian who shot and killed Senator Robert Kennedy in 1968, was denied parole yesterday. This was his 13th parole hearing and he will be eligible for his next hearing 2016.

Originally sentenced to death, his sentence was commuted after the California Supreme Court held that the death penalty as applied at the time was cruel and unusual punishment in 1972. The parole board took notice of reports from a defense team psychologist and the prison psychologist that said Sirhan no longer show violent tendancies and would not be a danger to society if released, but denied parole on the grounds that he neither appreciated the gravity of his crime nor expressed sufficient remorse.

Sirhan admitted to the crime in open court but has since insisted that he does not remember it. His attorney claims that Sirhan was set up as a fall guy and that he was “hypno-programmed”.

California Supreme Court To Hear Arguments Regarding Gay Marriage Ban

Erik Even — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 21:18:37 +0000

Almost exactly one year after the California Supreme Court heard arguments regarding the right for gay couples to marry, many of the same lawyers will be back on Thursday to argue if the state’s recent same-sex marriage ban should stand or be revoked.

This Thursday, the Supreme Court will hold three hours of oral arguments from 9:00 AM to noon on three lawsuits aimed at overturning Proposition 8, the voter approved ban on gay marriage approved in November of 2008.

Lawyers representing-same sex couples – 18,000 have been married since last year – and a group of local governments will get 90 minutes to present their arguments. Those lawyers include Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, Chief Deputy City Attorney Therese Stewart and Michael Maroko, a partner of Los Angeles lawyer Gloria Allred.

Sponsors of Proposition 8 have an hour. They are being represented by Pepperdine law school dean Kenneth Starr. California Attorney General Jerry Brown has declined to argue the state’s position. Deputy Attorney General Christopher Krueger will be arguing for the state.

California Supreme Court Grants Whistleblower Protection

Erik Even — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 03:41:25 +0000

The California Supreme Court granted whistle-blowers in state government protection on Thursday in a case where a low-level employee reported that her superior had violated a regulation she was supposed to enforce.

“The Legislature enacted the California Whistleblower Protection Act to protect the right of state employees ‘to report waste, fraud, abuse of authority, violation of law or threat to public health without fear of retribution,’ ” Justice Joyce L. Kennard wrote for a unanimous court.

“In adopting the act, the Legislature expressly found ‘that public servants best serve the citizenry when they can be candid and honest without reservation in conducting the people’s business.’”