What is the law applying to social media?

Useful Rulings on Social Media

Recent Rulings on Social Media

JAHANGIRI VS SANTAELLA, ET AL.

Plaintiff asserts that Santaella has converted the phone number, website, and social media accounts owned by S & J. She further alleges the website was responsible for directing to plaintiff about 80% of her new business. (FAC, ¶¶56-57.) Plaintiff has not alleged her ownership. Her claim of ownership and right to possession depend on her allegation that the corporation is no longer operational.

  • Hearing

YAZBECK VS PEATROSS

Cross-Defendants further vowed that Cross-Complainant would have continued access to Plaintiff's social media accounts. Ibid. Under the guise of Mr. Yazbeck's impending lawsuit, Cross-Defendants presented Cross-Complainant with a Shareholder's Agreement (the "Agreement") that provided for, inter alia, the sale of Dr.Jess.com to Plaintiff and Cross-Defendants, the issuance of 30,000 shares of stock in Plaintiff to Cross-Complainant, and the above promises. Ibid. at ¶¶ 25, 27.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Contract - Other

EILEEN A. STAATS V. CITY OF PALO ALTO

To supplement direct notice, JND will cause over 103,000 impressions targeted to Adults 18+ in Palo Alto, CA to be delivered over 30 days via the largest digital network (Google Display Network) and the top social media platform (Facebook). These digital ads will contain an embedded hyperlink to the case website. Notice will also be published in the Palo Alto Daily Post and be distributed as a press release to over 11,000 media outlets nationwide.

  • Hearing

ZRP GROUP LLC VS CHRIS TENNBERG

The crux of the complaint is the allegation that Plaintiff employed Tennberg as an independent contractor to design and launch websites for its business, and subsequently employed Tennberg as an employee in similar capacity. Plaintiff terminated Defendant’s employment when Plaintiff learned Defendant had hijacked its websites to display a message demanding that Plaintiff pay Defendant for design services and engaged in other similar social media based conduct.

  • Hearing

MATTHEW JACQUES VS THE CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH, A CALIFORNIA MUNICIPALITY, ET AL.

These facts are far removed from posts on social media that simply “relay” information about the issuance of a bench warrant. (Roger v. County of Riverside (2020) 44 Cal.App.4th 510, 528 [holding that 821.6 immunity did not apply to an administrative tasks of ministerial recordkeeping – entering a violation into a database and “relay[ing] that information to the DOJ”].)

  • Hearing

LUIS ROMAN VS ADVENT RESOURCES, INC.

Request No. 29 asks for the production all of Plaintiff’s social media posts and messages from January 2017 to the present, to which Plaintiff objected on grounds of overbreadth, but produced two documents subject to those objections. (Separate Statement at pp. 18–19.) Defendants contend that the request is warranted because investigation of Plaintiff’s social media posts may shed light on his disability claims. (Separate Statement at pp. 20–21.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

Beau Souci also continued to market its products on social media into July 2019. (AMF 30; Mansour’s Ex. 1 (Mansour Decl.), ¶ 13.) Defendants counter that these facts do not raise a triable issue as to whether Mansour’s job was terminated because the company was terminating its operations. As far as Beau Souci’s continued social media presence, Defendants assert that it is undisputed that Beau Souci was closing its California operations and continuing as a brand in Paris. (UMF 71.)

  • Hearing

CANDY LOPEZ VS UNITED PARCEL SERVICE INC ET AL

However, Price and Tefft planned to ambush Quon with questions relating to his social media accounts and the allegations against him by another employee. (TACC, ¶ 179.) Quon alleges that these “representations” were false, that Price and Tefft intended to induce Quon to attend the interview without representation, and that Quon was surprised and confused at the line of questioning, which reaction Price and Tefft then used against Quon to find that he was dishonest and uncooperative. (TACC, ¶¶ 181-182.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Discrimination/Harass

SPEEDY FUEL INC VS GILBARCO INC ET AL

Speedy “disputes that BAMS is entitled in this case to an employee’s past telephone numbers, past or present email addresses, past residence addresses, past or present business addresses, past or present employers, or past or present Facebook or other social media names and/or addresses.”

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Collections

ZAPRI OUTLAW VS ELLIOT AMOAKOH ET AL

Plaintiff has not contradicted that showing by citing to Amoakoh’s statements on social media or discovery responses. That an individual may serve as a personal trainer on certain occasions does not turn him or her into an agent authorized to accept service, much less a “person in charge” of a particular address that is purported to be a retail store. Accordingly, Kamani’s Motion to set aside the entry of default and quash service of summons is GRANTED. Moving party to give notice.

  • Hearing

IN RE ALPHABET, INC. SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION

At the time of the breach, Alphabet’s pattern of misleading, incomplete, and inaccurate statements regarding data privacy was already drawing heightened regulatory scrutiny and legal penalties, including a 20-year consent decree with the Federal Trade Commission related to charges that the company used deceptive tactics and violated its own privacy promises to consumers in connection with its social media network, Google Buzz. (Complaint, ¶¶ 208–213.)

  • Hearing

JARED LIEBERS VS CASEY WINTERS, ET AL.

Defendant explains that the text messages dated January 22-23 involved references to witness statements, information obtained from social media that purportedly contradicted plaintiff’s allegations regarding damages and the severity of his injuries, exchange of a media article researching plaintiff’s past, and information regarding plaintiff’s history.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

JORGE ROBLES, ET AL. VS MARIBEL HINOJOSA

Defendant contends that the allegation is incorporated into every cause of action in the Complaint and Plaintiffs candidly admit that their causes of action arise from Defendant’s “factual statements to third parties through written communications, including electronic mail, social media and through official complaints with government bodies . . .” (Complaint ¶ 21-22, 28, 38.)

  • Hearing

WOO VS ISODIOL INTERNATIONAL INC

This action arises out of a series of agreements whereby plaintiff Woo, through his marketing companies, performed "tradeshow, marketing, and social media management services" for the Isodial defendants. Plaintiffs allege they managed logistics for tradeshows "such as accommodation, packing, exhibit booths, coordinating with marketing teams, managing sponsorships, creation of marketing materials, development of staff training schedules, staffing booths," and also created "day-to-day social media content."

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

ZAPRI OUTLAW VS ELLIOT AMOAKOH ET AL

Plaintiff has not contradicted that showing with Amoakoh’s statements on social media or discovery responses. That an individual may serve as a personal trainer on certain occasions does not turn him or her into an agent authorized to accept service, much less a “person in charge” of a particular address that is purported to be a retail store. Accordingly, Kamani’s Motion to set aside the entry of default and quash service of summons is GRANTED. Moving party to give notice.

  • Hearing

CHANGJIANG LIU, ET AL. VS XUEQI JIANG, ET AL.

In addition, plaintiffs present a social media page purportedly written by Jiang in which Jiang purportedly indicated she owns One Zo Boba. (Ex. B to Opposition.) There is no declaration authenticating the social media page. (Evid. Code §§ 1400, 1401.) Further, the social media page is written in a foreign language. Cal. Rule of Court 3.1110(g) states: “Exhibits written in a foreign language must be accompanied by an English translation, certified under oath by a qualified interpreter.”

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

LIZA KATHRYN WOMACK VS FIRST ACCESS ENTERTAINMENT, LLC, ET AL.

Ahr had posted the video of himself taking Xanax to social media, the defendants called the venue promoter and advised that the show would in fact go forward as planned. (SAC, ¶ 39.) The defendants instructed Mr. Ahr to post a video on social media informing fans that he was fine and would be performing that night as scheduled. (SAC, ¶ 39.) Plaintiff alleges that Mr. Ahr’s death was the result of the “combined, cumulative effect of fentanyl and the [Xanax]” provided to him by the defendants.

  • Hearing

JOY SLAGEL VS LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY ET AL

During the meeting, Disney followed up with Plaintiff about its request for a Social Media Report back in August 2015. (SSF No. 23.) · Despite having never placed a request for the Social Media Report, Plaintiff told Disney that the Social Media Report had been previously ordered, but had come back “negative.” Plaintiff also told Disney that she was not able to locate the Social Media Report at that time, but that she would request another copy. (SSF Nos. 24-25.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

SCHEIN VS SAN DIEGO SPORTS MEDICINE AND FAMILY HEALTH CENTER

Shein has not responded to telephone calls, email or social media messages. Both I and my former assistant, Kimber Tabak, have tried to reach Ms. Schein several times. We have received no response." This is a valid reason for withdrawal; a client cannot expect a lawyer to represent him/her without remaining in contact with that attorney. The unopposed motion is granted. Counsel has filed the motion using the appropriate Judicial Council forms.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

ZHOIE PEREZ, AN INDIVIDUAL VS EDDUIN ZELAYA GRUNFELD, AN INDIVIDUAL, ET AL.

media (Id. at ¶¶ 39-40); and (4) at all relevant times, Grunfeld was employed as an armed security guard by SPS to identify threats and was acting in the scope of his employment.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

TIMED OUT LLC VS PRISMA ENTERTAINMENT LLC

Timed Out disclosed that it and Prisma had resolved the claims of two models, whose claims had apparently accrued after Chippewa no longer managed Prisma’s social media account, and that Prisma was immediately dismissing its cross-complaint against Chippewa. (Vallejo Decl. ¶ 5, Exh. A.) The course of the trial that occurred thereafter is a disputed matter, but a verdict was entered in Timed Out’s favor in the amount of $50,000 on January 24, 2020. Judgment on the verdict was entered on February 21, 2020.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

JAMES THEODORE BURGHARDT JR VS BRIGITTE YVON

Whether Defendant took 10 days before posting on social media or took the approximately one-and-a-half years between the time of the incident and the time the present motion was filed before posting on social media, the timing is not the critical factor – the certainty of the truth is. Of course, Plaintiff need not be certain before posting on social media; rather, Plaintiff only needs to have "use[d] reasonable care to determine the truth or falsity of the statement(s)." (CACI No. 1704.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

EUGENE HASSON VS CHABRE THADNISHA ROBERTSON, ET AL.

To include the entire file on insurance claim 0484405733 for a loss that occurred on 12/05/17; including but not limited to any x-rays, MRls, CT scans, medical records, medical reports, photographs of damage to vehicle, photographic evidence (photos, videos) of plaintiff; all investigation, subrosa films, social media search; property damage estimates and/or repairs; all pleadings and case related to this case including, demands, discovery responses, complaints, answers, depositions, statements, police reports

  • Hearing

CHUNG & ASSOCIATES LLC ET AL VS XAVIER RUFFIN ET AL

Plaintiff’s objections Plaintiff objects to the Declaration of Jane Lee (Plaintiff’s former Social Media Sr. Account Manager), Kurt Graver (Netflix’s employee), Theresa Moctezuma (Plaintiff’s former employee), Mickey Ferri, PhD (financial expert, who provided opinion inter alia on damages calculation), Tommy Gomez (entertainment expert), Xavier Ruffin, and Ricardo Mendoza. Plaintiff’s objections are not numbered in violation of the California Rules of Court. See Cal.

  • Hearing

DYLAN RIEDER FOUNDATION, INC. VS. TRADE GOTHIC, LLC

In terms of using the same domain name and social media accounts, that was allowed pursuant to ¶20 of the Licensing Agreement (Murray Decl., Ex. 7). All in all, WY Partners is not a successor company of TG. Rather, WY Partners acquired just a slice of TG’s business, i.e., rights to the “What Youth” name. Although there is some overlap, it does not appear to have been formed as shell or conduit for the other. Additionally, there is no evidence of disregard of corporate formalities.

  • Hearing

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.