Try our Advanced Search for more refined results

Ruggiero v. Greeley

Track this case

Case Number:

3:23-cv-00191

Court:

Connecticut

Nature of Suit:

Trademark

Judge:

S. Dave Vatti

Firms

  1. October 03, 2025

    Deceased IP Attys' Names Worth $55K, Conn. Judge Rules

    A Connecticut federal judge has declined to upend an expert's valuation amounting to $54,775 in a trademark infringement suit over the names of deceased law partners that appear in the masthead of intellectual property firm Ohlandt Greeley Ruggiero & Perle LLP, determining such a change is unwarranted.

  2. August 27, 2025

    IP Atty Challenges 'Pittance' Valuation Of Ex-Partners' Names

    A longtime Connecticut intellectual property lawyer who left Ohlandt Greeley Ruggiero & Perle LLP to launch his own firm says the names of two deceased partners are worth more to a remaining attorney than an expert's proposed 2% licensing fee, arguing the names achieved "celebrity status" in the IP community.

  3. July 15, 2025

    Former IP Partners' Names Worth $52K, Expert Testifies

    The names of two deceased law partners are worth between $28,000 and $52,000 per year to a Connecticut intellectual property boutique, an expert testified Tuesday during a federal court hearing in a valuation dispute between two of the late lawyers' colleagues.

  4. January 29, 2024

    Conn. IP Atty Can Send Holiday Cards To Rival's Clients

    A Connecticut magistrate judge ruled Monday that while a settlement agreement barring an intellectual property attorney from contacting his ex-partner's clients extends to the attorney's new firm, it doesn't prevent the lawyer from sending holiday greetings because the prohibition's broadness flouted Connecticut state law.

  5. January 24, 2024

    Conn. Atty Must Withdraw Billing Notices To Rival's Clients

    Stamford, Connecticut-based intellectual property attorney Paul D. Greeley must send corrective messages to a competitor's clients after his firm accidentally sent them allegedly improper billing statements, a Connecticut federal judge ordered Wednesday.

  6. January 19, 2024

    Client Marketing May Be 'Fair Game' In Atty Fight, Judge Says

    Courts might not have the authority to order an attorney to refrain from marketing to a competitor's clients, an "exceptionally skeptical" Connecticut federal judge observed Friday as he considered a dispute arising from a settlement between two former law partners.

  7. October 12, 2023

    Ex-Partner Slams 'Continued Use' Of Name Despite Settlement

    A Connecticut attorney who sued his former law partner, alleging unauthorized use of his name in mailings and online, is asking a federal judge to step in and enforce a settlement agreement meant to put an end to the "co-opting" of his name.

  8. June 02, 2023

    Conn. Atty Settles Name Suit With Ex-Partner

    A conflict between a Connecticut attorney and his former partner over their firm's name — which included three suits in both state and federal court — has come to an end after the group reached a settlement.

  9. March 29, 2023

    Conn. Atty Says Ex-Partner Failed To Grasp His Suit's Claims

    A Connecticut lawyer locked in a fight with a former partner over their firm's name says the former partner showed a "fundamental misunderstanding" by alleging that the suit involves an improper trademark claim, arguing that he never alleged any infringement. 

  10. March 20, 2023

    Conn. Atty Looks To Boot Ex-Partner's Suit

    A lawyer has asked a Connecticut federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit brought by his former partner of more than 20 years, arguing that a dispute over a law firm's name is a matter of state contract law and not a trademark issue.