22
Mar/12

EDNY: 'Self-serving' Testimony Not Sufficient For Summary Judgment


All defendants except remaining defendant settle with or are voluntarily dismissed by Nike. All testify that remaining defendant is the ‘orchestrator of the counterfeit shoe importation.’

“Defendant. . . has not come forward with facts to dispute their testimony. Technically, he has not met his obligation to do so under the summary judgment rule. Yet, the history of this case provides a slight basis for arguing that these witnesses and former defendants have an incentive to fabricate their testimony in order to avoid their own liability. Such credibility determinations should be made by the jury.”

Nike v Kau Summary Judgement

Comments are closed.