ESA Seeks Legal Fees for Brown v. EMA from California

July 25, 2011 -

The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) is seeking $1.1 million in legal fees from California for its work related to Brown v. EMA. The move is not an unfamiliar one for the trade group, who has successfully sued and won fees in the lower courts in states throughout the country (notably Louisiana, Michigan, and Illinois), but this is a first at the highest level of the U.S. court system.

"It's unfortunate that some officials continue to believe that unconstitutional laws are the answer, when time and time again courts have thrown out these bills and proven them to be a waste of taxpayers' dollars," the ESA said in a statement... four years ago. Hopefully California's government will listen after this expensive lesson in constitutional law.

SCOTUS Blog has an excellent analysis of the challenges the ESA may face in collecting the fees it wants at this level and what precedents it could set for the future of lawsuits. You can read all that here. Below is the most interesting part:

"Presumably, the Supreme Court has the authority to order a fee shift, or to pass the motion down to the Ninth Circuit Court or the District Court to consider. It is unknown whether the fact that the Supreme Court agreed to hear the state’s appeal — something it had the discretion not to do — would play a part in its consideration of the motion.

Because the Supreme Court seldom is asked to shift fees in cases before it, the Justices may be a bit surprised at how high those fees can go when well-compensated, experienced lawyers are involved, and bring with them a sizeable team of associates. Lower courts, of course, routinely are faced with often pricey fee requests."

Source: Ars Technica


Comments

Re: ESA Seeks Legal Fees for Brown v. EMA from California

This state is broke anyways. The other 49 and Guam will bail us out.

 

Which sucks since I've tried everything I can to get hack politicians out of office in this state. Hell it's insanity that people didn't want a "3rd Arnold term" yet they elected Moonbeam for a 3rd time.

Re: ESA Seeks Legal Fees for Brown v. EMA from California

Interestingly, the amount that the ESA and EMA is seeking is just over three times the total amount of legal fees they've won from California after the District Court and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals combined(about $370,000 total) and more than double what Illinois paid($510,000).

California brought it on themselves. Shame that the legislators that voted for the bill won't have the money docked from their salaries, although I feel that them, former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, current governor Jerry Brown(attorney general at the time), and Leland Yee should each pay an equal 25% of that $1.1 million.

Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Pelicans. Solidarity for the Saints = No retreat, no surrender. 2013 = Saints' revenge on the NFL. Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always.

Re: ESA Seeks Legal Fees for Brown v. EMA from California

I personally think the Ethics committee should investigate Mr. Yee for this disaster. I have a hunch he knew that the law was unconstitutional, but just didn't care. I hope they do investigate him and recommend ousting his sorry butt from California politics, therefore disqualifying him from the mayoral election he's trying to enter.

Re: ESA Seeks Legal Fees for Brown v. EMA from California

Its hard for me. I'm not paying California taxes, but I feel for those who live there. If they win this I hope that Yee actually has to explain it in a future election while explaining how they can't afford welfare and medicaid. Though the issue will probably never come up.

-Austin from Oregon

Feel free to check out my blog.

Re: ESA Seeks Legal Fees for Brown v. EMA from California

Good. I hope the ESA wins this as well. Its even more california taxpayer money that yee wasted on his stupid law.

Re: ESA Seeks Legal Fees for Brown v. EMA from California

.....although, it should really be coming out of HIS pocket. Not the poor taxpayers who really had nothing to do with it and were probably against the law as well. poor bastards

Re: ESA Seeks Legal Fees for Brown v. EMA from California

I'm sure a lot of the money in his pocket is from the taxpayers anyways.
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Code Avarice's Paranautical Activity make its way back onto Steam?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
NeenekoJust look at how interviews are handled. Media tends to pit someone who is at best a journalist, but usually entertainer, against an expert, and it is presented and percieved as if they are equals.10/25/2014 - 7:38am
Neeneko@MC - Focusing on perpetrator does nothing for prevention, the media and public lack the domain knowledge and event details to draw any useful conclusions. All we get are armchair risk experts.10/25/2014 - 7:36am
Neeneko@AE - no name or picture, I like it.10/25/2014 - 7:34am
PHX Corp@MW and AE The news media needs to stop promoting the Shooters. period10/25/2014 - 7:16am
Andrew EisenWhen I write about these massacres, I don't use the shooter's name or picture. I'm not saying everyone has to play it that way but that's how I prefer to do it.10/25/2014 - 12:44am
Andrew EisenYep, it's why the news media stopped spotlighting numbnuts who run out on the field during sporting events.10/25/2014 - 12:01am
Matthew Wilsonin media research its called the copycat effect. it simply says that if the news covers one mass shooting shooter, it increases the likelihood of another person going on a mass shooting.10/25/2014 - 12:00am
Andrew EisenAgreed. It bugs me that I know the names, faces and personal histories of a bunch of mass shooters but I couldn't tell you the name of or recognize a photo of a single one of their victims.10/24/2014 - 11:51pm
AvalongodAgree with Quiknkold. @Mecha...if that worked we would have figured out how to prevent these long ago.10/24/2014 - 11:32pm
MechaCrashUnfortunately, you have to focus on the perpetrator to figure out the whys so you can try to prevent it from happening again.10/24/2014 - 10:55pm
quiknkoldpoor girl. poor victims. rather focus on them then the shooter. giving too much thought to the monster takes away from the victims.10/24/2014 - 10:15pm
Andrew EisenFor what it's worth, early reports are painting the motive as "he was pissed that a particular girl wouldn't date him."10/24/2014 - 10:12pm
quiknkoldwell then I suck as a man cause I ask for help when necessary :P10/24/2014 - 10:07pm
Technogeek(That said, mostly I was making the smartass evopsych comment because your post seemed like the kind of just-so story that has come to dominate 99% of its usage.)10/24/2014 - 10:04pm
TechnogeekHell, Liam Neeson built his modern career around it. Cultural factors likely play a far greater role than you appear willing to admit.10/24/2014 - 10:03pm
TechnogeekSeriously, though, the idea of "because women are protectors and that's why they never commit school shootings" is, at best, grossly overreductive. There's nothing inherently feminine about being willing to kill in order to protect one's offspring.10/24/2014 - 10:03pm
MechaCrashThe "toxic masculinity" thing refers to how you have to SUCK IT UP AND BE A MAN because seeking help is seen as weakness, which means you suck at manliness, so it builds and builds and builds until something finally snaps.10/24/2014 - 10:01pm
quiknkoldthere, I'm done. And thats what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown10/24/2014 - 9:54pm
quiknkoldand I am not spouting Evopsych, technogeek. tbh I never heard the phrase till you said it. I'm going off my observations.10/24/2014 - 9:54pm
quiknkoldmoreover, the guy who did this isnt even white. He was native american according to the news report I read. Also that he went for a specific target. That's a much different picture than a certain Sandy Hook guy who will not be named10/24/2014 - 9:53pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician