Digital Media Law Project
Published on Digital Media Law Project (https://www.dmlp.org)

Home > Blazi v. Wagoner

Blazi v. Wagoner [1]

Submitted by DMLP Staff on Fri, 06/19/2009 - 11:16

Summary

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Date: 

09/19/2008

Status: 

Concluded

Disposition: 

Dismissed (total)

Location: 

Connecticut

Verdict or Settlement Amount: 

N/A

Legal Claims: 

Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
Conspiracy
Trademark Infringement
Unfair Competition
The owner of a Connecticut coffee shop sued two former employees in federal court, asserting that they violated federal and state law when they allegedly converted the coffee shop's website into a forum to launch verbal attacks on the store and its... read full description
Parties

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Jason Wagoner; Nicholas DeGrazia

Type of Party: 

Individual
Organization

Type of Party: 

Individual

Location of Party: 

  • Connecticut

Location of Party: 

  • Connecticut

Legal Counsel: 

Bethany B. Karas

Legal Counsel: 

Pro se
Description

The owner of a Connecticut coffee shop sued two former employees in federal court, asserting that they violated federal and state law when they allegedly converted the coffee shop's website into a forum to launch verbal attacks on the store and its owner. In his complaint [2], John A. Blazi, the owner of Greenwich Coffee, LLC, accused Jason Wagoner and Nicolas DeGrazia of trademark infringement, violating state and federal unfair competition laws, false representation, violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and conspiracy.

In the complaint, Blazi accused the defendants of using GreenwichCoffee.com, the coffee shop's former website, as a "web-based campaign of discrediting the store" in hopes of running it out of business. Compl. [2] ¶ 17. The domain name, although initially used for official Greenwich Coffee business, was registered solely in Wagoner's name without Blazi's permission, according to the complaint. Compl. [2] ¶ 12. 

The defendants denied [3] the allegations and filed a motion to dismiss [4] the suit on the grounds that the plaintiff had filed an almost identical suit in Connecticut state court. The plaintiff objected [5] to the motion on the grounds that Blazi was not the plaintiff in the state lawsuit, the state complaint named an additional defendant, and the federal claims were not included in the state suit.  The United States District Court for the District of Connecticut granted [6] the motion to dismiss the federal suit Feb. 4, 2009. The court stated its main reasons for its ruling were the presence of identical underlying facts in both cases, the state court's ability to apply federal law to the other lawsuit, and inconvenience to the defendants.

Greenwich Coffee, LLC v. DeGrazia, the suit in state court, has yet to be resolved, according to the Connecticut Judicial Branch's website [7].

Related Links: 

  • Dozier Internet Law's case report [8]
  • Conecticut Judicial Branch's case detail [7]
Details

Web Site(s) Involved: 

GreenwichCoffee.com (now defunct)

GreenwichCoffee.net (now defunct)

Content Type: 

  • Text

Publication Medium: 

Website

Subject Area: 

  • Trademark
  • Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
  • Domain Names
Court Information & Documents

Jurisdiction: 

  • Connecticut

Source of Law: 

  • United States
  • Connecticut

Court Name: 

United States District Court for the District Connecticut

Court Type: 

Federal

Case Number: 

3:08-cv-01441

Relevant Documents: 

PDF icon 2008-09-19-Blazi Complaint.pdf [9]
PDF icon 2008-10-20-Defendants' Answer.pdf [10]
PDF icon 2008-10-20-Motion to Dismiss.pdf [11]
PDF icon 2008-10-29-Plaintiffs' Objection to Motion to Dismiss.pdf [12]
PDF icon 2009-02-04-Ruling on Motion to Dismiss.pdf [13]
CMLP Information (Private)

Priority: 

1-High

CMLP Notes: 

Source: Dozier Internet Law

Note: It isn't clear whether the state case in the Superior Court of
Connecticut for the Judicial District of Waterbury (CV084015494) constitutes a threat for the Database because it relies on different claims.  Whoever edits this entry should look for info regarding the state case to see if it warrants a separate threat entry.

CMF-6/4/09

DMLP Logo


Source URL (modified on 08/20/2014 - 11:08pm): https://www.dmlp.org/threats/blazi-v-wagoner

Links
[1] https://www.dmlp.org/threats/blazi-v-wagoner
[2] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-09-19-Blazi%20Complaint.pdf
[3] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-10-20-Defendants%27%20Answer.pdf
[4] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-10-20-Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf
[5] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-10-29-Plaintiffs%27%20Objection%20to%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf
[6] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2009-02-04-Ruling%20on%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf
[7] http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail/PublicCaseDetail.aspx?DocketNo=UWYCV084015494S
[8] http://dozier-internetlaw.blogspot.com/2008_10_01_archive.html
[9] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-09-19-Blazi%20Complaint.pdf
[10] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-10-20-Defendants%27%20Answer.pdf
[11] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-10-20-Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf
[12] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2008-10-29-Plaintiffs%27%20Objection%20to%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf
[13] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2009-02-04-Ruling%20on%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf