Mudd Law Offices

Providing Legal Representation to Individuals and Business Organizations

 
 
SELECTED LITIGATION MATTERS
 

Current Selected Litigation Matters

 
We represent a wide variety of clients in a myriad of litigation contexts in state and federal courts throughout the United States. While licensed with the bars in Illinois, Indiana, and Connecticut, Charles Lee Mudd Jr. has appeared as pro hac vice counsel in all regions of the United States.


Anonymity on the Internet

We have successfully resolved many cases involving anonymity on the Internet on behalf of anonymous individuals, providers of anonymous services, and plaintiffs. Our past matters have involving anonymity in the context of defamation, privacy, and other claims. (Selected Past Matters)

 

 

Contractual and Employment Relations

Phillips v. Atlas Galleries, Inc., 07 CV 003385 (Circuit Court of Cook County)

Our firm represents international artist Frederick Phillips in litigation filed against Atlas Galleries, Inc. of Chicago, Illinois. The Complaint includes claims for declaratory judgment seeking to declare the contract between the parties unconscionable; fraudulent inducement; breach of contract; and violation of the Illinois Consignment of Art Act.

 

 

Defamation

Tamburo v. Dworkin, et al., 04 C 3317 (Northern District of Illinois)

We represent all but one of the multiple defendants sued by Plaintiff John Tamburo for defamation and a host of other claims. Plaintiff Tamburo obtained facts contained within some of the Defendants' online databases of dog pedigrees using spider programs. Plaintiff Tamburo later incorporated this date into his own commercial product. The Defendants learned of this and complained of Plaintiff Tamburo's conduct online. Specifically, the Defendants ontend that Plaintiff Tamburo obtained the data without authorization. This case also involves issues of copyright of databases. Two of the Defendants reside outside the United States.

On behalf of the Defendants, Charles Mudd filed a motion to dismiss upon a variety of grounds. The Court granted the motion to dismiss as John Tamburo did not constitute the true party in interest. The Court further instructed John Tamburo, who had proceeded pro se, to obtain counsel. Defendants intend to file a motion to dismiss should John Tamburo proceed with counsel in this action.

 

 

Intellectual Property Litigation

Allison v. Wise, et al., 07 cv 143 (District of Colorado)
Allison v. Wise, et al., Case 1:07-cv-00143-REB-PAC (Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division)

Charles Lee Mudd Jr. represents Jeremy Wise in litigation brought against Mr. Wise and others for alleged copyright infringement of cheat codes.

In Colorado, Charles filed a motion to dismiss on behalf of Jeremy Wise for lack of personal jurisdiction. The Court granted this motion. Allison thereafter filed suit in Ohio. This matter continues. Currently, Allison filed a motion seeking to exclude evidence that suggests he did not author cheat codes at issue in the litigation.

Scott Eversoll, et al. v. Earl Clark, et al., 04 C 6457 (N.D. Illinois)

We represent Scott Eversoll and Marty Jensen in a copyright infringement action brough against Earl Clark and other parties for infringement of the song "I Found Jesus on the Jailhouse Floor." Plaintiffs have settled with all but Earl Clark and Earl Clark Music. Pushing forward against these final defendants, we obtained default judgment, entered the judgment in a foreign jurisdiction, and have successfully collected royalties on behalf of our clients.

Lions Gate Entertainment, Inc., et al. v. CafePress.com, Inc., et al., 06 CV 7917 (C.D. California)

Our firm has represented shop owner defendants in litigation brought by Lions Gate Entertainment and other parties for alleged trademark infringement, copyright infringement, unfair competition, and related claims.

Tamburo v. Dworkin, et al., 04 C 3317 (N.D. Ill.)

We represent all but one of the multiple defendants sued by Plaintiff John Tamburo for defamation and a host of other claims. Plaintiff Tamburo obtained facts contained within some of the Defendants' online databases of dog pedigrees using spider programs. Plaintiff Tamburo later incorporated this date into his own commercial product. The Defendants learned of this and complained of Plaintiff Tamburo's conduct online. Specifically, the Defendants ontend that Plaintiff Tamburo obtained the data without authorization. This case also involves issues of copyright of databases. Two of the Defendants reside outside the United States.

On behalf of the Defendants, Charles Mudd filed a motion to dismiss upon a variety of grounds. The Court granted the motion to dismiss as John Tamburo did not constitute the true party in interest. The Court further instructed John Tamburo, who had proceeded pro se, to obtain counsel. He did so. The Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. The Court granted this motion.

This matter is on appeal in the Seventh Circuit.

 
 

Privacy Related Litigation

Steinbach v. Village of Forest Park, et al., 06 CV 4215 (N.D. Illinois)

Our firm represents Commissioner Theresa Steinbach in this action against Defendants for violation of federal and state wiretapping statutes (and related privacy claims) for unauthorized intrusion into Commissioner Steinbach's private email account and distribution of private emails to the Mayor of the Village of Forest Park.

 

** Doe Litigation

At any one time, we have a number of cases involving Doe Plaintiffs who have been victimized by individuals publishing photographs and videos on the Internet without authorization. For the privacy of the present Plaintiffs, we will not discuss specific details related to the litigation.

 

 

 
DISCLAIMER  |  PRIVACY POLICY

Contact Information for our offices in Chicago, Illinois and Park City, Utah


© 2005-2012 Mudd Law Offices
All Rights Reserved

 
  Individual Services
  Business Services
  Our Clients
  OUR CASES
     Current Cases
     Past Cases
  Recent Updates
  Stages of RIAA Initiative
     Subpoena
     Identity Revealed
     John Doe Lawsuits I
     John Doe Lawsuits II
     Amnesty
  Judicial Opinions
  MPAA Legal Initiative
  Litigation
  Our Representation