| Defendant Who Dealt Crack
Next to SDNY In Smith Houses Gets 66 Months
Then Case Disappears
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon,
Periscope
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
July 1 – A defendant who pled
guilty to selling crack in the
Alfred E. Smith housing
projects right next to the U.S.
District Court
for the
Southern
District of
New York was
sentenced to
66 months in
prison on July
1 by SDNY
Judge Gregory
H. Woods. Then
the case
disappeared
the from the
day's calendar
on Pacer. For
the record, it
is US v.
Marqus
Sargeant,
18-cr-471
(Woods).
The U.S.
Sentencing
Guidelines
called for
87-108 months;
there was a 60
month
mandatory
minimum. Judge
Woods as is
his way dug
deep into the
pre-sentencing
report,
modifying a
few
paragraphs,
and wishing
the defendant
well. But why
did the case
then disappear
from the
calendar? And
what happens
to sealed
filings?
Hearst
Communications, Inc. lost its
bid to block the issuance of a
subpoena for its chief legal
officer Eve Burton to have to
testify in a July 15 trial of
copyright claims to a photo of
President Donald J. Trump
crashing a wedding.
After oral
argument on July 1, in which
Hearst's lawyers told SDNY
Judge Gregory H. Woods that
Ms. Burton is simply too busy
to testify, and in any event
has no direct knowledge of the
copyright training program at
issue, Judge Woods issued an
oral ruling denying Hearst's
motion in limine.
First,
Judge Woods noted that the
so-called "Apex Witness"
doctrine Hearst relied on
applies to taking depositions
of senior officials, not to
trial testimony. Then, more
colloquially, he asked the
Hearst lawyer what it would
cost, beyond the cost of a
subway ride from 57th Street,
a short walk and an hour of
testimony.
The
Hearst lawyer said that these
things - presumably meaning
taking the stand in a trial -
have a way of eating up more
time than anticipated. The
case is Otto v. Hearst
Communications, Inc.
17-cv-4712 (Woods).
Plaintiff
photograph Jonathan Otto's
lawyer cited as precedent a
case in which a BuzzFeed
official had to testify.
Hearst's lawyer replied that
BuzzFeed is "tiny," noting
that Hearst has an investment
in it.
Ass
Inner City Press reported in
May 2019, BuzzFeed Media is
being sued, rather routinely,
for using a Florida
photographer's aerial shot of
Miami's American Airlines
Arena, see below. And on May
28 into the SDNY, otherwise occupied
with Michael Avenatti, came
the case of CollegeHumor.com's
use of a Himalayan Dog photo
by photographer Sebastian
Wahlhuetter. The publication
took place in 2016, in an
article entitled "20 Random
Reddit Photos Turned Into Epid
Movie Posters." But the
lawsuit was filed in February
2019. College Humor was
ordered by SDNY Judge Lorna G.
Schofield to respond by May
20, but there is no response
in the docket as of the May 28
hearing date. The case is
19-cv-2501, Jury Trial
Demanded. Now the demand is
for $3,000 in damages, $10,000
in statutory damages, $2037.50
in attorneys' fees and $475 in
costs and, of course,
interest. This
is the SDNY.
On
May 14 Gizmodo was sued, by
photographer David McGlynn,
for using his photo of Malcoln
Abbott which ran in the New
York Post on March 13, 2019,
in a story about the Varsity
Blues scandal.
L'affaire Gizmodo has
been assigned tp
U.S. District
Court for the
Southern
District of
New York Judge Alison
J. Nathan,
who recently
presided over
SEC v. Elon
Musk. Might
her approach
to DMCA claims
be different
than fellow
SDNY Judge
Vernon
Broderick?
On May 10
BuzzFeed's lawyer argued that
under the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act they can demand
attorney's fees from the
photographer, even if they
lose, if the judgment is less
than what they have
offered. That case is Myeress
v BuzzFeed Inc,
18-cv-2365 (VSB).
***
Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold
Station NY NY 10017
SDNY: Press Room 20,
40 Foley Square, NY NY 10007
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2019 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com for
|
,
