Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

catbyte

(34,364 posts)
Wed Jul 1, 2020, 08:03 PM Jul 2020

Presiding Justice Scheinkman (Appellate Division) has lifted the TRO against Simon & Schuster


Justice Scheinkman (Appellate Division) has lifted the TRO against Simon & Schuster restraining it from publishing Mary Trump’s book. The TRO remains in effect as to Ms. Trump, but we will be filing a brief in the trial court tomorrow explaining why it must be vacated.
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Presiding Justice Scheinkman (Appellate Division) has lifted the TRO against Simon & Schuster (Original Post) catbyte Jul 2020 OP
The order was ridiculous in the first place if it was based on the NDA. The Velveteen Ocelot Jul 2020 #1
Thank You, Ma'am The Magistrate Jul 2020 #2
Thanks. Newest Reality Jul 2020 #3
It's still there. The Velveteen Ocelot Jul 2020 #5
And now even more people will want to buy her book crimycarny Jul 2020 #4
More detail here: The Velveteen Ocelot Jul 2020 #6

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,660 posts)
1. The order was ridiculous in the first place if it was based on the NDA.
Wed Jul 1, 2020, 08:10 PM
Jul 2020

Simon & Schuster wasn't a party to the NDA, so how could they be restrained from publishing the book? Even as to Mary Trump, normally the remedy for the breach of an NDA would be financial damages. I think her lawyers can make a good argument that preventing publication of the book would be an impermissible prior restraint.

Newest Reality

(12,712 posts)
3. Thanks.
Wed Jul 1, 2020, 08:28 PM
Jul 2020

I thought that might happen, or at least should.

Tweet went bye-bye though. Was it deleted for some reason?

crimycarny

(1,351 posts)
4. And now even more people will want to buy her book
Wed Jul 1, 2020, 08:34 PM
Jul 2020

Nothing like telling people they can’t have something to drum up interest!

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,660 posts)
6. More detail here:
Wed Jul 1, 2020, 08:58 PM
Jul 2020
“While Ms. Trump unquestionably possesses the same First Amendment expressive rights belonging to all Americans, she also possesses the right to enter into contracts, including the right to contract away her First Amendment rights,” Scheinkman wrote.

Scheinkman found that, while anyone can enter into a confidentiality agreement, courts are “not necessarily obligated” to enforce such agreements. Courts must balance the interests of the party seeking to enforce the contract with “other legitimate interests, including, especially in this context, the public interest,” he wrote.

“Drawing the appropriate balance may well require in camera review of the book sought to be enjoined … the legitimate interest in preserving family secrets may be one thing for the family of a real estate developer, no matter how successful; it is another matter for the family of the President of the United States,” Scheinkman wrote.
https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2020/07/01/ny-appeals-court-keeps-block-against-mary-trump-in-book-fight-but-lifts-it-for-her-publisher/
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Presiding Justice Scheink...