August 21, 2015 in Case Summaries

Jeff Levinger successfully represented well-known Dallas attorney Daniel Sheehan in his appeal of an order of civil contempt and incarceration that a federal district judge issued against him while he was defending his client against a charge that it was in contempt of a prior injunction. The Fifth Circuit vacated the order in its entirety, holding that Sheehan “was not provided adequate due process” and that “there was insufficient evidence to find that he personally violated the injunction” previously issued by the district court. Sheehan’s successful challenge to the contempt order received extensive coverage in the Texas Lawyer and other legal publications. Robin Singh Educational Services, Inc. v. Testmasters Educational Services, Inc. v. Sheehan, 799 F.3d 437 (5th Cir. 2015).

Courts: Federal Courts of Appeals
Subject Matter: Ethics & Professional Malpractice

February 7, 2013 in Case Summaries

Jeff Levinger represented Paddle Tramps Manufacturing, a leading nationwide producer of fraternity and sorority items, in a trademark infringement case addressing the interplay between the equitable defense of laches and the availability of permanent injunctive relief in a trademark infringement case.  Working with trademark lawyers Molly Richard and Elizann Carroll, Levinger helped them persuade a Dallas federal court jury that Paddle Tramps’ opponents, 32 of the country’s largest fraternity and sorority organizations, were guilty of laches by waiting over 40 years to enforce their rights to their trademarks.  Based on this finding, the federal district judge denied the Greek Organizations’ request for damages and broad injunctive relief against Paddle Tramps, instead limiting Paddle Tramps’ ability to use the marks on certain advertising and products going forward.  On appeal, the Fifth Circuit rejected the Greek Organizations’ challenges to the jury instructions and the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the jury’s verdict.  But the Court also upheld the injunction against Paddle Tramps on the ground that its overall business would not be substantially prejudiced.  Kenneth Abraham, d/b/a Paddle Tramps Manufacturing Co. v. Alpha Chi Omega, et al., 708 F.3d 614 (5th Cir. 2013).

Courts:  Federal Courts of Appeals
Subject Matter:  Intellectual Property

October 11, 2012 in Case Summaries

Jeff Levinger represented Gruma, the manufacturer of Mexican food products sold under the well-known trademark MISSION, in its appeal seeking to reverse a district court’s conclusion that a Mexican restaurant chain called MISSION BURRITOS was not infringing upon or diluting Gruma’s MISSION trademark.  Despite the high level of deference that appellate courts ordinarily give to trial court’s findings of fact, the Fifth Circuit held that the district court had clearly erred in finding no likelihood of confusion or dilution from the restaurant chain’s use of the MISSION BURRITO mark.  The Fifth Circuit remanded the case to the lower court to determine the appropriate scope of injunctive relief against the future use of the MISSION BURRITO mark.  Gruma Corp. v. Mexican Restaurants, Inc., 2012 WL 4842036 (5th Cir. Oct. 11, 2012).

Courts:  Federal Courts of Appeals
Subject Matter:  Intellectual Property

March 20, 2012 in Case Summaries

Jeff Levinger was retained to appeal a federal district court’s dismissal of a € 136 million fraudulent transfer action brought by MC Asset Recovery, a bankruptcy litigation trustee of Mirant Corporation, against a group of European lenders.  The district court had dismissed the case after deciding that the applicable fraudulent transfer law was supplied by Georgia, which did not allow for the avoidance of the guaranty transaction at issue.  On appeal, Levinger persuaded the Fifth Circuit that controlling choice-of-law principles required the application of New York law rather than Georgia law.  The Court also rejected the lenders’ argument that MC Asset Recovery lacked standing to sue because the creditors of Mirant purportedly had been paid in full.  Based on these rulings, the Fifth Circuit remanded the case to be decided on the merits under the New York fraudulent transfer statute.  MC Asset Recovery LLC v. Commerzbank A.G., 675 F.3d 530 (5th Cir. 2012).

Courts:  Federal Courts of Appeals
Subject Matter:  Procedural and Evidentiary Issues; Bankruptcy

December 30, 2011 in Case Summaries

Jeff Levinger represented Flint Hills Resources in its appeal seeking to overturn a federal district court’s declaratory judgment allowing Travis County to build a railroad spur over Flint Hills’ pipeline easement.  Relying on an infrequently invoked Texas statute and the language of the easement, the Fifth Circuit reversed and held that the County could not build the spur over the easement unless it first pays Flint Hills for the substantial costs of fortifying the pipeline and relocating it to a greater depth.  Travis County, Texas v. Flint Hills Resources, L.P., 456 Fed. Appx. 410, 2011 WL 6934492 (5th Cir. Dec. 30, 2011).

Courts:  Federal Courts of Appeals
Subject Matter:  Oil & Gas/Real Estate