Losing an early battle can feel like the beginning of winning the war. Such was the case Thursday in a defamation suit brought by two law professors who claim West Publishing falsely identified them as the authors of a publication so poorly researched it would harm their reputations if it remained on library shelves. The professors lost their bid for an immediate injunction, but the judge seemed to declare the professors have proven some of their claims and in the end could be entitled to monetary damages.

More...

In refusing to issue any injunction to prevent further irreparable damage, Senior U.S. District Judge John P. Fullam found that "the harm has already been done" in his opinion in Rudovsky v. West Publishing Corp.

In the suit, professors David Rudovsky of the University of Pennsylvania and Leonard Sosnov of Widener Law School claim that they did none of the work on the December 2008 supplement, or "pocket part," to their book, "Pennsylvania Criminal Procedure: Law, Commentary and Forms."
The professors demanded an injunction, arguing that West should be ordered to notify all recipients of the supplement that Rudovsky and Sosnov were not the authors and that any unhappy customers had the right to demand a refund.

The professors’ lawyer, Richard L. Bazelon of Bazelon Less & Feldman, argued that the supplement was a "sham" that offered almost nothing new to subscribers and that users of the book would mistakenly connect the poor quality to Rudovsky and Sosnov.