Blog« back to blog homeSubscribe to RSS feed
Bryan Sullivan Discusses Nike’s Recent $7.5 Million Discrimination Case Verdict in Women’s Wear Daily and WWD’s Footwear News
Category: News, Press | Friday, July 24th, 2026 | Comments Off on Bryan Sullivan Discusses Nike’s Recent $7.5 Million Discrimination Case Verdict in Women’s Wear Daily and WWD’s Footwear News
Bryan Sullivan recently spoke with Women’s Wear Daily about Nike Inc.’s $7.5 million gender discrimination case verdict on July 22, 2026. In a subsequent article about Nike’s high-profile visibility, WWD’s Footwear News also published Bryan’s comments.
Both articles outline that jurors found Nike violated both federal and state laws by discriminating against a former engineer because of her gender. Bryan explains that this case illustrates how high-profile companies are experiencing a learning curve in balancing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies with federal and state laws.
“This is a no-win situation for companies,” Bryan tells WWD and Footwear News. “The Trump administration may retaliate against a company for having strong DEI initiatives, but the Trump administration’s position on DEI doesn’t dictate what a jury will decide under separate state laws like Oregon, and companies will have to decide which risk they want to bear going forward.”
Bryan adds that while the “Trump administration only has two and a half years left, state laws will be around a lot longer.”
In February, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed an action for enforcement of an administrative subpoena against Nike, seeking documents in connection to a discrimination probe involving intentional race discrimination against White employees and job applicants. Nike signed a settlement agreement with the EEOC during the final weeks of Biden’s presidency, but it was withdrawn when Trump took office.
Both articles also note that Bryan previously spoke with Footwear News when the story initially broke in February, highlighting how high-profile brands can become an easy target.
“High-visibility companies with well-publicized DEI commitments are more likely to become test cases, regardless of whether their practices are meaningfully different from peers,” Bryan tells Footwear News. “In that sense, Nike may be less of an outlier and more of a bellwether for how these issues are being examined right now.”
Read the full article in Women’s Wear Daily.
Read the full article in WDD’s Footwear News.
Bryan Sullivan Discusses the Potential Delay in the Paramount-Warner Bros. $110 Billion Merger Due to State Antitrust Suit in TheWrap
Category: News, Press | Tuesday, July 14th, 2026 | Comments Off on Bryan Sullivan Discusses the Potential Delay in the Paramount-Warner Bros. $110 Billion Merger Due to State Antitrust Suit in TheWrap
Bryan Sullivan recently spoke with TheWrap about the long-awaited Paramount deal to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery, which could potentially be delayed due to 12 state attorneys general filing a lawsuit challenging the $110 billion merger.
The article, titled “Paramount-Warner Bros. May Face Devastating Delay With State Antitrust Suit | Analysis,” outlines the lawsuit’s allegation that the deal would reduce competition, giving the combined company ultimate power.
A federal judge temporarily halted the transaction, and if a restraining order is granted, could alter Paramount’s self-imposed September 30, 2026 deadline, leaving them responsible to pay a daily “ticketing fee” to shareholders. This would amount to roughly $650 million each quarter. Paramount argues that the lawsuit fundamentally exposes flawed application of antitrust laws. However, the states may have a high probability of obtaining the restraining order.
Bryan tells TheWrap that he can see the merits of the arguments on both sides, but agrees the states likely have enough to warrant an injunction.
“The court typically looks at the potential harms on both sides, and the ticketing fee would be a factor,” Bryan explains.
He goes on to validate Paramount’s argument regarding the threat of big tech, while maintaining that the case will come down to a statistical analysis of the harms in each of the states that are suing.
“Given the whole nature of the entertainment industry being upended in the last several years, this is a case where both sides have good arguments to make,” he concludes.
Read the full article in TheWrap (Subscription required).
Los Angeles Business Journal Names Scott Gizer to its 2026 “Leaders of Influence: Litigators & Trial Attorneys” List
Category: Awards, News | Monday, July 13th, 2026 | Comments Off on Los Angeles Business Journal Names Scott Gizer to its 2026 “Leaders of Influence: Litigators & Trial Attorneys” List
The firm is pleased to announce that Scott Gizer has been recognized in the Los Angeles Business Journal’s “Leaders of Influence: Litigators & Trial Attorneys” list for 2026. The annual issue honors the most sought-after trial attorneys in the Los Angeles region, selected through a rigorous editorial process based on a demonstration of impact on both the profession and the greater community.
Describing this year’s honorees, the Business Journal notes “There is a special breed or attorney that needs to transcend expert comprehension of the legal system – the litigator. Lawyers who go to the proverbial mat to fight for their clients before judges and jury
have their own unique sets of skills.”
Scott’s profile highlights his stellar results for his clients, including as “the go-to coverage counsel for all of the major title insurers in the United States,” noting that he has tried over 30 cases as a first chair during his 23 year career.
Read Scott’s profile and the full list in the Los Angeles Business Journal:
Leaders of Influence: Litigators & Trial Attorneys – Los Angeles Business Journal
Bryan Sullivan Speaks to The Guardian on the Ordered Release of $5.8 Million in Trump Judgment
Category: News, Press | Thursday, July 9th, 2026 | Comments Off on Bryan Sullivan Speaks to The Guardian on the Ordered Release of $5.8 Million in Trump Judgment
Bryan Sullivan recently spoke with The Guardian about a U.S. judge’s ruling ordering Donald Trump to release 5.8 million dollars to E. Jean Carroll following his loss of Carroll’s sexual abuse and defamation trial against him in 2023. The article, titled “US judge orders release of $5.8m Trump owes E. Jean Carroll after court loss,” delves into Trump’s ordered distribution of the jury award and how he seeks to combat the release.
The payment stems from the 2023 defamation and sexual abuse lawsuit, which E. Jean Carroll won against Trump. The court then ordered a five-million-dollar jury award, but due to Trump’s decision to appeal the ruling, he deposited the award at an 11% interest rate, ultimately accumulating to 5.8 million dollars. The Supreme Court denied Trump’s appeal on June 29, allowing the Manhattan judge to order the release of the jury award. On June 30, Carroll’s legal team, led by Roberta Kaplan, stressed that it’s time for the case to end, and on July 1, requested that the disbursement of money be expedited. The Judge granted the request, causing Trump’s team to quickly compile a thorough argument against the release of the funds, and asked the Supreme Court to rehear his request for review.
Bryan weighs in on the Supreme Court’s decision to potentially rehear Trump’s request, sharing with The Guardian, “I think that would be a really tough argument.” He goes on to agree with Carroll’s lead attorney, emphasizing that the case has reached its end and states, “I think Roberta Kaplan said it best: he’s at the end of the line here.”
He continues on to share why he doubts the Supreme Court would reconsider its denial, noting that the Supreme Court rarely ever considers cases to begin with. He continues to highlight to The Guardian that the success on initial requests is “slim to none, on average,” and that the case would not have a severe impact on U.S. law in ways others might.
Read the full article in The Guardian.
Early Sullivan Named to 2026 “Law Firms List” by the Los Angeles Business Journal
Category: Awards, News | Monday, June 29th, 2026 | Comments Off on Early Sullivan Named to 2026 “Law Firms List” by the Los Angeles Business Journal
Early Sullivan Wright Gizer & McRae is pleased to announce that the firm was recently honored by the Los Angeles Business Journal on its 2026 “Law Firms List.” The list annually recognizes the most highly regarded law firms in the Los Angeles region. Describing this year’s honorees, the LABJ notes, “In such a large and highly competitive legal market with thousands of firms across the region, being included on the List is an important distinction and strong recognition of a firm’s presence in the Los Angeles legal community.”
Read the full list in the Los Angeles Business Journal (subscription required):
2026 Top Law Firms – Los Angeles Business Journal
Early Sullivan Obtains Defense Verdict in Jury Trial for First American Title Insurance
Category: Results, Results | Friday, June 12th, 2026 | Comments Off on Early Sullivan Obtains Defense Verdict in Jury Trial for First American Title Insurance
Scott Gizer, Lisa Boswell and Jessica Detering prevailed on behalf of Early Sullivan client First American Title Insurance Company in a bad faith action arising out of a neighbor dispute in the City of Sierra Madre. Following a two-week trial, the jury delivered a unanimous verdict in favor of First American. The lawsuit centered around a dispute between Plaintiffs and their neighbors, both of which were insured by First American, over certain improvements of the neighbors that encroached onto Plaintiffs’ property.
Plaintiffs sued their neighbors to have the encroachments removed and the neighbors tendered a claim to First American, which was accepted and counsel appointed to defend against the claim as well as assert a cross-complaint for an easement. Plaintiffs then tendered the defense of the cross-complaint to First American, which First American accepted, but elected to pay Plaintiffs for the loss of the property at issue as opposed to defending the claim. Plaintiffs argued that First American’s decision to defend one insured and payout the other was improper as it allegedly favored one insured over the other.
Mr. Gizer, Ms. Boswell and Ms. Detering put on evidence that when First American insures both sides of a dispute each claim is handled independently to avoid any claims of favoritism and that such was the case with Plaintiffs and their neighbors. The Early Sullivan trial team put on further evidence that electing to defend the neighbors and making a payout to the Plaintiffs was reasonable based on the facts of each claim since it was unlikely that the Plaintiffs would be able to prevail against their neighbors. Further, First American at various times encouraged Plaintiffs to settle their dispute and not continue with litigation for this exact reason.
Ultimately, Plaintiffs lost their lawsuit against their neighbors, but blamed First American for the result seeking damages of more than $1.5 million. After hearing all the evidence, the jury deliberated for two hours and found against Plaintiffs on all claims. The case is Cesar Romero and Tatana Romero v. First American Title Insurance Company, Los Angeles County Case No. BC656649.
View the filed special verdict here.
Bryan Sullivan Speaks to Law360 on Patagonia’s Ongoing Trademark Infringement Lawsuit Against Drag Queen Pattie Gonia
Category: News, Press | Friday, June 5th, 2026 | Comments Off on Bryan Sullivan Speaks to Law360 on Patagonia’s Ongoing Trademark Infringement Lawsuit Against Drag Queen Pattie Gonia
Bryan Sullivan recently spoke with Law360 about American retailer Patagonia suing drag queen and activist Pattie Gonia, who filed a trademark application to use their full drag name for the purposes of selling merchandise. The article, titled “Is Pattie Gonna Get Out Of This? Patagonia’s IP And PR Pickle,” outlines that while Patagonia supports Pattie Gonia’s advocacy for issues like environmentalism and LGBTQ+ rights, the brand maintains that the drag name could confuse consumers and interfere with the Patagonia brand.
The trademark infringement suit has gained public interest from both intellectual property and popular culture standpoints. While this may cause PR headaches, trademark attorneys agree that IP enforcement and public relations management will not always be in perfect alignment.
Bryan sheds light on why the enforcement pressure in trademark law may not be obvious to the general public.
“Nonlawyers and nontrademark people would probably jump in and accuse Patagonia of being a bully, but [the company is] obligated to enforce their trademark,” Bryan tells Law360.
He goes on to explain that if Patagonia decides not to enforce its trademark, it could raise the risk of arguments of selective enforcement.
“If there are too many instances of them not enforcing the trademark, there are arguments against them if they try to enforce it. It can’t be selective enforcement,” he concludes.
Read the full article in Law360 (Subscription required).
The Daily Journal Names Devin McRae to its 2026 List of the “Top Intellectual Property Lawyers” in California
Category: Awards, News | Wednesday, May 20th, 2026 | Comments Off on The Daily Journal Names Devin McRae to its 2026 List of the “Top Intellectual Property Lawyers” in California
The firm is pleased to announce that Devin McRae has been named to the Los Angeles and San Francisco Daily Journal’s list of the “Top Intellectual Property Lawyers” in California for 2026. The annual list honors “California’s top lawyers specializing in patent litigation, trademark and copyright.”
In the special issue, Devin was recognized for his recent representations of a screenwriter whose personal managers had exploited their position of trust, resulting in reduced compensation and diminished writing credit on a major film, as well as a film director asserting the right to complete a film on terms previously negotiated with the producers.
Of the former, Devin says that “the case was significant to me due to the principles involved, chief among them the fight to enforce agreements and fiduciary duties upon sharp-elbowed operators with large power advantages and weaker consciences.”
In his profile, the Daily Journal also delves into Devin’s early defense of a studio and producer against copyright infringement claims involving a reality television series, which he credits for beginning his trajectory in IP litigation.
“I dove deep into copyright law more so than any other subject I had litigated, and I had never enjoyed working on a case as much as that one,” Devin tells the Daily Journal.
To read Devin’s full profile in the Daily Journal, click Download PDF.
Bryan Sullivan Speaks to Bisnow About Tenant Unions in New York City
Category: News, Press | Tuesday, May 12th, 2026 | Comments Off on Bryan Sullivan Speaks to Bisnow About Tenant Unions in New York City
Bryan Sullivan recently spoke to Bisnow about the recent uptick of tenant unions in New York City following the bankruptcy proceedings of Pinnacle Group, which led to the sale of more than 5,200 rent-stabilized apartments. Notably, the Union of Pinnacle Tenants has earned an ally in Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who recently participated in a virtual town hall meeting in order to listen to the union’s concerns and has made addressing the rising cost of living in the city a core focal point of his agenda while in office.
The Tenant Power Act, introduced last month, would require landlords to negotiate with unions and create a statewide tenant association to assist in organizing if passed. Bryan tells Bisnow that tenants can exercise their rights more powerfully by organizing in large groups to submit complaints to the city.
“If it’s a 60-unit apartment and 58 units are filing complaints, [government agencies will] take that a lot more seriously than a 60-unit apartment and two units are filing complaints,” Bryan explains.
Read the full article in Bisnow.
Bryan Sullivan Analyzes the Economic Impact of Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni’s Legal Battle in Page Six
Category: News, Press | Monday, May 11th, 2026 | Comments Off on Bryan Sullivan Analyzes the Economic Impact of Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni’s Legal Battle in Page Six
Bryan Sullivan recently weighed in on the cost of Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni’s drawn-out legal battle in Page Six. Lively and Baldoni, who sued and countersued each other for hundreds of millions of dollars over disputes relating to their film It Ends With Us, recently reached a settlement – but neither party earned any money. While their legal fees are not known to the public, Bryan tells Page Six that the pair’s combined fees could stretch into the multi-million dollar range.
“Over the course of a few years of prolonged litigation, those costs accumulate quickly,” he explains.
Lively is reportedly pursuing legal action against Baldoni in the hopes of having her legal fees reimbursed, further highlighting the financial impact of the suit.
“As a result, even without a financial settlement, the legal fees themselves represent the primary economic impact of the case,” Bryan concludes.