Judge decides administration may have tried to stifle free speech

Judge decides administration may have tried to stifle free speech Case name: Beverly, et al. v. Watson, et al., No. 14 C 4970 (N.D. Ill. 09/29/17).Ruling: The U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois refused to grant summary judgment in a suit against Chicago State University.What it means: The power of a university to control the civility and tone of a faculty blog is limited.Summary: In 2009, Chicago State University professors Phillip Beverly and Robert Bionaz were instrumental in founding a blog entitled “CSU Faculty Voice.”During a 2013 meeting, President Wayne Watson and Vice President Patrick Cage expressed concern to Beverly that the blog didn't adhere to generally accepted civility standards.A few days later, Cage sent Beverly a letter ordering him to “disable” the blog because it was using CSU's trade names and marks without permission. However, CSU had never perfected any of those trademark rights at that time.Beverly and Bionaz refused to shut down the blog.According to Vice President LaShondra Peebles, Watson told her he needed her help in trying to get rid of Beverly.Beverly and Bionaz filed a suit against the university and others that asserted several claims. One of them was that the 2013 Cage “Cease and Desist” letter was in retaliation for exercising their rights of free speech.The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing the purpose of the letter was to protect intellectual property rights.But the judge observed that CSU had no trademark rights in its marks at the time the letter was sent, and also that the Cage letter made numerous references to the lack of civility in their blog. Because of those factors, and because the letter was sent shortly after the 2013 meeting when Watson and Cage expressed displeasure about the blog, she ruled that a jury could reasonably conclude that the Cage letter wasn't sent to protect trademarks.The judge ruled that Beverly and Bionaz had presented sufficient evidence from which a jury could reasonably conclude that the actions were in retaliation for the exercise of the right to freedom of speech. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Campus Legal Advisor Wiley

Judge decides administration may have tried to stifle free speech

Campus Legal Advisor , Volume 18 (7) – Jan 1, 2018
Free
1 page

Loading next page...
1 Page
 
/lp/wiley/judge-decides-administration-may-have-tried-to-stifle-free-speech-8dvenKyrTk
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
ISSN
1531-3999
eISSN
1945-6239
D.O.I.
10.1002/cala.30745
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Case name: Beverly, et al. v. Watson, et al., No. 14 C 4970 (N.D. Ill. 09/29/17).Ruling: The U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois refused to grant summary judgment in a suit against Chicago State University.What it means: The power of a university to control the civility and tone of a faculty blog is limited.Summary: In 2009, Chicago State University professors Phillip Beverly and Robert Bionaz were instrumental in founding a blog entitled “CSU Faculty Voice.”During a 2013 meeting, President Wayne Watson and Vice President Patrick Cage expressed concern to Beverly that the blog didn't adhere to generally accepted civility standards.A few days later, Cage sent Beverly a letter ordering him to “disable” the blog because it was using CSU's trade names and marks without permission. However, CSU had never perfected any of those trademark rights at that time.Beverly and Bionaz refused to shut down the blog.According to Vice President LaShondra Peebles, Watson told her he needed her help in trying to get rid of Beverly.Beverly and Bionaz filed a suit against the university and others that asserted several claims. One of them was that the 2013 Cage “Cease and Desist” letter was in retaliation for exercising their rights of free speech.The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing the purpose of the letter was to protect intellectual property rights.But the judge observed that CSU had no trademark rights in its marks at the time the letter was sent, and also that the Cage letter made numerous references to the lack of civility in their blog. Because of those factors, and because the letter was sent shortly after the 2013 meeting when Watson and Cage expressed displeasure about the blog, she ruled that a jury could reasonably conclude that the Cage letter wasn't sent to protect trademarks.The judge ruled that Beverly and Bionaz had presented sufficient evidence from which a jury could reasonably conclude that the actions were in retaliation for the exercise of the right to freedom of speech.

Journal

Campus Legal AdvisorWiley

Published: Jan 1, 2018

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off