Court won't get into battle between 2 USCs
Lawyer Blogs
The Supreme Court won't decide who really owns the initials "SC" when it comes to college sports: the University of Southern California or the University of South Carolina.
The high court on Monday refused to hear an appeal from South Carolina, which wanted to trademark a baseball cap logo with the initials "SC."
The Trojans already have a trademark on a version of "SC" and say the Gamecocks' symbol looks too much like theirs. The California school says it has sold tens of millions of dollars of apparel with "SC" on it, while South Carolina only wanted to start using those initials on baseball caps in 1997.
Courts have rejected South Carolina's trademark.
The case is University of South Carolina v. University of Southern California, 09-1270.
Related listings
-
Court won't speed challenge to MN disclosure law
Lawyer Blogs 10/04/2010A federal appeals court has declined to fast-track a challenge against a Minnesota law requiring disclosure of corporate political spending.In an order Monday, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals denied a motion to expedite the case, and it scheduled or...
-
California calls off murderer's execution
Lawyer Blogs 10/01/2010The execution of a convicted rapist-murderer in California has been called off after rulings in state and federal courts, officials said Wednesday.The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation removed Albert Greenwood Brown's execution ...
-
High court looks at military funeral protests
Lawyer Blogs 09/30/2010One thing Al Snyder wants to make clear: His boy fought and died for freedom in Iraq, but not for the right of some "wackos" to spew hate at soldiers' funerals under the protection of the Constitution."It's an insult to myself, my family and the vete...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.