Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

2nd Cir. News: Incest, Lululemon, the Hopper and Spying on Muslims

By Gabriella Khorasanee, JD on February 24, 2014 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

Where do we begin? There is so much legal news brewing in the Second Circuit that we couldn't just pick one story to highlight. Here's a quick roundup of litigation that's making headlines in the Second Circuit.

When Is Incest, Incest?

Um, one would think the answer to that question is -- always. But, in a recent Board of Immigration Appeals decision regarding whether a marriage between a woman and her husband by "half-blood" is void for incest under New York law, the Second Circuit certified the question to the New York Court of Appeals. Though the effect of the precedent may not be very wide-reaching, we're all curious to see how the court decides this one.

Lululemon's Angry Shareholders

A while back it seemed Lululemon could do no wrong with its infamous yoga pants finding fans in women (and the men who like to see women in yoga pants). But then there was a product recall, negative press, and slow growth to contend with and now shareholders have filed an action claiming that between September 7, 2012 and January 10, 2014, Lululemon mislead and defrauded shareholders, reports Reuters.

Duking It Out Over the Hopper

The Dish Network's Hopper does not have any fans among television broadcast networks as suits in New York and California have been filed with networks alleging that Dish is violating copyright laws by letting subscribers copy their programming. Dish preemptively sued for a declaratory judgment that the Hopper did not violate the networks' copyrights, and the networks sought for a preliminary injunction. Judge Swain of the Southern District of New York denied the motion for preliminary injunction and the networks are appealing, as trial preparation continues, reports Reuters.

Surveillance of Muslims

A recent ruling by the District Court for the District of New Jersey ruled that police surveillance of Muslims, stemming from the 9/11 terrorist attacks, did not violate the rights of targeted Muslims, reports Bloomberg. Dismissing the suit, Judge Martini wrote: "The police could not have monitored New Jersey for Muslim terrorist activities without monitoring the Muslim community itself," according to Bloomberg.

As developments are made in these cases, we'll continue to keep you updated.

Related Resources:

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard