quinn emanuel
quinn emanuel urquhart & sullivan, llp | business litigation report
INSIDE
France: Adoption of Trade
Secrets Law
Page 5
Practice Area Updates:
Bankruptcy & Restructuring
Litigation Update
Page 7
EU Litigation Update
Page 9
Major Appellate Victory for
Pacic Gas and Electric in
Wildre Case and Other
Victories
Page 10
Attorney Advertising
August 2018
los angeles | new york | san francisco | silicon valley | chicago | washington, d.c. | houston | seattle | boston | tokyo
london | mannheim | hamburg | munich | paris | hong kong | sydney | brussels | zurich | shanghai | perth | stuttgart
(continued on page 2)
The Implications of the United States Supreme Court’s
Murphy v. NCAA
Decision
on Legalized Sports Betting
On May 14, 2018, the United States Supreme Court
paved the way for the expansion of legalized sports
gambling with its decision in Murphy v. Nat’l Collegiate
Court held that the Professional and Amateur Sports
Protection Act (“PASPA”)—the federal law that for
over twenty-ve years prohibited states from passing
any new laws authorizing gambling on professional
or amateur sporting events—was an unconstitutional
violation of states’ rights. With the prohibitions of
PASPA no longer in place, the expansion of legalized
sports betting is already underway: Within weeks of
the decision, the rst legal sports bets in the United
States (outside of Nevada) were taken in Delaware
and New Jersey. Other states will follow. is
article examines the potential legal implications of
the Murphy decision on sports betting in the United
States.
Background on the Murphy Decision
Congress enacted PASPA in 1992 to prevent the
spread of legal sports gambling beyond any state that
already allowed it at that time. Instead of preventing
individuals from betting on sporting events, Congress
prohibited the states from legalizing sports gambling
by declaring it unlawful for any “governmental
entity to sponsor, operate, advertise, promote,
license, or authorize by law or compact . . . a lottery,
sweepstakes, or other betting, gambling, or wagering
scheme based . . . on” competitive sporting events.
28 U.S.C. § 3702. At the time, Nevada was the only
state that allowed widespread betting on individual
sporting events. Delaware, Oregon, and Montana
allowed very limited forms of sports betting such as
sports pools or NFL parlay betting.
is status quo was maintained for over two
decades, even as the explosion of the internet
Maaren Shah and Luke Nikas Named to
Benchmark Litigation
’s
“40 & Under Hot List”
New York partners Luke Nikas and Maaren Shah have been named to Benchmark
Litigation’s “40 & Under Hot List” for 2018. Mr. Nikas was ranked for General
Commercial Litigation and Ms. Shah was ranked for Appellate, Financial Services, and
General Commercial Litigation. is annual list recognizes outstanding lawyers ages 40
and under achieving signicant success in the U.S. and Canada.
Q
Richard C. Smith Named Among Most Inuential Black
Lawyers of 2018 by
Savoy Magazine
Washington, D.C. partner Richard C. Smith has been named among Savoy Magazine’s
“2018 Most Inuential Black Lawyers” in its recent issue featuring the “best of the
best” Black lawyers in the United States. e publication’s list highlights attorneys who
have achieved outstanding results and are widely recognized for their inuence in the
legal eld. Mr. Smith has also been named one of the Top 100 Black Lawyers by the
National Black Lawyers organization from 2015 to 2018.
Q
Quinn Emanuel Partners Named “Litigation Trailblazers” by
The National Law Journal
Juan P. Morillo, Kevin Johnson, and Charlie Verhoeven were named “Litigation
Trailblazers” by e National Law Journal. Mr. Morillo was ranked for White Collar,
Regulatory, and Compliance and Mr. Johnson and Mr. Verhoeven for Intellectual
Property. e publication received hundreds of nominations for each practice area, and
selected those who are achieving extraordinary success in their eld.
Q
