{"id":17627,"date":"2023-03-03T20:27:00","date_gmt":"2023-03-03T20:27:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.injuryinsiders.com\/?p=17627"},"modified":"2023-03-03T20:27:00","modified_gmt":"2023-03-03T20:27:00","slug":"lawyers-super-bowl-ad-leads-to-litigation-2-biglaw-firms-end-merger-talks","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.injuryinsiders.com\/?p=17627","title":{"rendered":"Lawyer’s Super Bowl ad leads to litigation; 2 BigLaw firms end merger talks"},"content":{"rendered":"

[ad_1]
\n
<\/p>\n

\n
    \n
  1. Home<\/a><\/li>\n
  2. Daily News<\/a><\/li>\n
  3. Weekly Briefs: Lawyer’s Super Bowl ad leads\u2026<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    News Roundup<\/p>\n

    Weekly Briefs: Lawyer’s Super Bowl ad leads to litigation; 2 BigLaw firms end merger talks<\/h2>\n

    By Debra Cassens Weiss<\/a><\/p>\n

    NFL objects to firm\u2019s Super Bowl ad, leading to suit<\/strong><\/p>\n

    The Dimopoulos Law Firm in Las Vegas is seeking a declaratory judgment that its Super Bowl commercial did not infringe trademarks of NFL Properties and the Las Vegas Raiders. The law firm sued after the NFL sent a cease-and-desist letter. The ad, which aired in the Las Vegas market, shows three athletes preparing for competition, along with a lawyer putting on a suit jacket before court. One of the athletes was Maxx Crosby of the Las Vegas Raiders, who is shown in Raiders team colors of black and silver. The same colors are used in the firm\u2019s marketing. No logos are shown for teams or the NFL; instead, the athletes are sporting the firm\u2019s logo, the lawsuit says. The logo includes a shield\u2014which is also part of the Raiders\u2019 logo, according to Reuters. (Reuters<\/a>, the March 1 lawsuit<\/a>, the Super Bowl ad<\/a>)<\/p>\n

    Shearman, Hogan Lovells end merger talks<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Shearman & Sterling and Hogan Lovells have called off merger talks. \u201cAs has been widely reported, our firms have been in preliminary and exploratory conversations regarding a possible combination,\u201d the law firms said Thursday in a joint statement. \u201cAfter careful consideration, we have mutually agreed that a combination at this time is not in the best interest of either firm. We have been deeply impressed with each other\u2019s business, practices and people and wish each other continued success.\u201d (Law.com<\/a>, Reuters<\/a>)<\/p>\n

    Former federal judge joins BigLaw firm<\/strong><\/p>\n

    After leaving the federal bench in Maryland on Feb. 24, former Judge George Hazel is planning a career in BigLaw. Hazel will join Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher after serving nine years on the federal bench. Hazel told Law360 that he wants the opportunity to earn more money for his family. And he told Law.com that, after watching great trial lawyers, he is eager to \u201cstep back into the well of the courtroom and fight on behalf of clients.\u201d (Law360<\/a>, Law.com<\/a>)<\/p>\n

    Opioid distributors win drug-dealer liability suit<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Three companies that distribute opioids won a civil lawsuit Wednesday that was brought under the Georgia Drug Dealer Liability Act. Nearly two dozen plaintiffs had filed the pioneering suit against Cardinal Health, the McKesson Corp. and the J.M. Smith Corp. Few suits filed over opioids have used a drug dealer theory or have sought money for individuals. According to Law360, the verdict may have \u201cset a major boundary\u201d for legal exposure in opioid litigation. (Law360<\/a>)<\/p>\n

    Federal appeals judge is \u2018a little disturbed\u2019 about opinion language<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Judge D. Brooks Smith of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Philadelphia is concerned that judges are sending the wrong message to the public when their opinions use less-than-collegial language. \u201cI\u2019m a little disturbed by some language I see from time to time in the present day that is a bit more combative than what I\u2019ve seen in the past,\u201d Smith said. \u201cIt\u2019s something we judges need to keep in mind. It makes for great ink if you\u2019re in the news media to draw on differences between judges and what seem to be sharp exchanges between judges. If for no other reason than the fact that it does make for a good angle is probably a reason to avoid it.\u201d Smith spoke at an event sponsored by the Supreme Court Historical Society. (Law.com<\/a>)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n