Clemente Properties, Inc. v. Pierluisi-Urrutia, Case No. 23-1922 (1st Cir. 2026).
Puerto Rico officials use of a deceased baseball player’s name and image on commemorative license plates and registration tags without authorization states colorable Lanham Act claims for trademark infringement, false association, and dilution against individual government officials in their personal capacities, but sovereign immunity bars claims against the Commonwealth and officials in their official capacities, and the Takings Clause does not protect trademark rights from government use.
Sirius Solutions, L.L.L.P. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Case No. 24-60240 (5th Cir. 2026).
The term “limited partner” in 26 U.S.C. § 1402(a)(13) refers to any partner in a limited partnership with limited liability rather than only passive investors, thereby exempting a limited partner’s distributive share of partnership income from self-employment taxation regardless of the partner's active participation in partnership management or operations.
Boyd v. Northern Biomedical Research, Inc., Case No. 25-1001 (6th Cir. 2026).
A minority shareholder, who sold his shares in a closely held corporation, states viable common law fiduciary duty claims under Michigan law when corporate officers and directors failed to disclose ongoing private equity financing negotiations that would have substantially increased the company’s valuation. Federal securities law claims fail where, balancing probability and magnitude, the shareholder cannot establish that omissions regarding contingent equity financing discussions were material under the basic deal framework.
Vining v. Charles J. Taunt & Associates, P.C. (In re: M.T.G., Inc.), Case No. 24-1979 (6th Cir. 2026).
A bankruptcy trustee’s undisclosed conflict of interest with the estate’s largest secured creditor does not render prior court-authorized transfers void ab initio or support subsequent fraud, avoidance, or conversion claims, where treating the orders as retroactively invalid would restore parties to the same positions they occupied at the bankruptcy petition date and potentially harm the estate by eliminating settlement value.
Diamond Sands Apartments, LLC v. Clark County Nevada, Case No. 25-2884 (9th Cir. 2026).
An apartment complex owner failed to demonstrate serious questions on the merits that $4,000 in fines for unauthorized short-term rental violations were grossly disproportionate under the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause where the owner had knowledge of improper rentals and failed to eliminate violations, the fines fell on the low end of the authorized range, and the county’s legislative findings supplied a rational basis for penalties aimed at deterring harms to residents from unlicensed short-term rentals.
