Lawyers Weigh In On Supreme Court's Lexmark Ruling

Law360, New York (March 25, 2014, 8:33 PM EDT) -- The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday clarified the standard for bringing false advertising claims under the Lanham Act, resolving a three-way split among the circuit courts. Here, attorneys tell Law360 why the ruling in Lexmark International Inc. v. Static Control Components Inc. is important.

David M. Axelrad, Horvitz & Levy LLP

"The Supreme Court's affirmation in Lexmark that 'the proximate-cause requirement generally bars suits for alleged harm that is "too remote" from the defendant's unlawful conduct,' is an important reminder of a fundamental principle of tort law. As the court explained, the question presented by the requirement of proof of causation...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.


  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!