« If everyone is a Nazi . . . | Main | Legal Ed's Past »

Sunday, April 15, 2018

Naruto lives

Naruto v. Slater, the so-called "Monkey Selfie" case, lives. The Ninth Circuit denied the Joint Motion to Dismiss the Appeal and Vacate the Judgment, filed after the parties settled. In denying the motion, the court relied on cases in which courts have declined to dismiss appeals following briefing and argument, particularly where the judges suspect a party settled to avoid adverse precedent. Oh, and Naruto was not party to the settlement. (H/T: A Civ Pro student who is interested in the case, since the Complaint is one of the models we use in class).

So now we will get to see if Naruto loses on the merits (as he should, because the scope of a statute is a merits issue) or on standing grounds (as the argument sounded the court was heading).

Posted by Howard Wasserman on April 15, 2018 at 10:28 PM in Civil Procedure, Howard Wasserman | Permalink


Thanks for drawing our attention to such important ruling . So , it seems that in conceptual and legal terms , three reasons for denying such motions :

Investments and public return , abusive strategy , and importance of the case ( for further lower courts in future cases ) . So , if I have well understood , in that particular case , it is rather the resources invested by the court , here I quote :

" As in Albers, this case has been fully briefed and argued by both sides, and the court has expended considerable resources to come to a resolution. Denying the motion to dismiss ensures that “the investment of public resources already devoted to this litigation will have some return."


Posted by: El roam | Apr 16, 2018 6:00:59 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.