Highfields Capital Management L.P. v. Doe

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• relying on Dendrite and Cahill in holding that it “is not enough for a plaintiff simply to plead and pray”
• noting protected nature of “sardonic commentary on a public corporation ... through irony and parody”
• quashing a subpoena to identify an anonymous defendant where the plaintiff failed to adduce evidence suffi cient to make a prima facie showing as to likelihood of confusion
• adopting a “prima facie” standard which requires the party seeking enforcement of a subpoena to first make out “a real evidentiary basis for believing that the defendant has engaged in wrongful conduct that has caused real harm to the interests of the plaintiff”
• “In context, [the statements] are clearly sardonic opinion or parody, not to be taken seriously by anyone.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).