Legal News

Federal Judge Prohibits Use of ‘Fake News’ Term in Court Proceedings
Download PDF
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading...

A federal judge in the Eastern District of Texas, Rodney Gilstrap, recently issued a ruling restricting certain words’ use in a patent infringement retrial between two rival garage-door opener makers. The judge has barred the use of terms such as “yahoos,” “fake news,” and “patent factory” in the courtroom.

The purpose of this ruling is to prevent the use of prejudicial language in front of the jury, which is a common practice in patent cases. For example, words such as “pirates,” “bandits,” or “trolls” are frequently banned in patent cases as they could potentially influence the jury.

In the first trial, one of the lawyers referred to the jury pool as “yahoos” and stated that the opposing side filed the lawsuit in Marshall, Texas, because they believed the citizens of East Texas were “yahoos” and wouldn’t use their common sense.

  
What
Where


Judge Gilstrap granted a motion to bar any reference to the jury pool, court, or citizens constituting the jury pool as “yahoos” or any similar derogatory terms. He further instructed the lawyers not to refer to the intelligence of the jury, the court, the Marshall Division population, or the Eastern District of Texas.

The judge ruled that the term “yahoos” was derogatory and should not be used, and two other terms, “patent factory” and “fake news,” were also off limits. However, the parties are still allowed to use the term “frivolous” in their closing arguments to attack the opposing side’s arguments.

This ruling highlights the importance of avoiding prejudicial language in courtrooms and ensuring that the proceedings are fair and impartial. Lawyers will now have to be more creative and find alternative ways to attack the opposing side’s arguments.

Get JD Journal in Your Mail

Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!




It is also worth noting that this ruling is not a violation of the First Amendment, as the judge is simply trying to ensure that there is no prejudicial language used in front of the jury. Such restrictions are becoming increasingly common in patent cases, as certain words can potentially influence the trial’s outcome.

In conclusion, the ruling by Judge Gilstrap in the Eastern District of Texas serves as a reminder of the importance of avoiding prejudicial language in courtrooms and the need to ensure that the proceedings are fair and impartial.





 

RELEVANT JOBS

Associate Attorney

USA-PA-Exton

ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY McKenna Snyder LLC, a law firm in Exton, PA has an immediate opening for an ex...

Apply now

Attorney

USA-MI-Sturgis

Qualifications: HaasCaywood is seeking associate attorneys for our Coldwater and Sturgis, Michiga...

Apply now

Attorney

USA-MI-Coldwater

Qualifications: HaasCaywood is seeking associate attorneys for our Coldwater and Sturgis, Michiga...

Apply now

Deputy General Counsel / Senior Deputy General Counsel

USA-CA-Sacramento

Cal Cities Culture and Mission Cal Cities is dedicated to creating a collaborative and inclusive ...

Apply now

BCG FEATURED JOB

Locations:

Keyword:



Search Now

Education Law Attorney

USA-CA-El Segundo

El Segundo office of a BCG Attorney Search Top Ranked Law Firm seeks an education law attorney with ...

Apply Now

Education Law Attorney

USA-CA-Carlsbad

Carlsbad office of a BCG Attorney Search Top Ranked Law Firm seeks an education law attorney with 4-...

Apply Now

Education Law and Public Entity Attorney

USA-CA-El Segundo

El Segundo office of a BCG Attorney Search Top Ranked Law Firm seeks an education law and public ent...

Apply Now

Most Popular

SEARCH IN ARCHIVE

To Top