Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group, Inc.
Decided May 14, 2020. Sonia Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court.
Docket 18-1086 · 590 U.S. 405 (2020) · Cited 252 times
Holding
Because the trademark action at issue challenged different conduct—and raised different claims—from an earlier action between the parties, Marcel cannot preclude Lucky Brand from raising new defenses, including a defense that Lucky Brand failed to press fully in the earlier suit.
The Court’s statement of the holding, from the opinion’s syllabus. The syllabus is prepared by the Reporter of Decisions and is not part of the opinion of the Court. Read the official opinion for authority.
How the Justices voted
Decided 9–0.
Majority · 9
“Concurring” means agreeing with the outcome; any split shown is the Court’s judgment, not each Justice’s reasoning. The lineup is the syllabus’s disposition of who wrote and joined each opinion. Source: the opinion’s syllabus (supremecourt.gov).
Precedents cited
Supreme Court decisions this opinion relies on, ordered by how often it cites each. Cases in our collection link through; others are named.
- Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore · 439 U.S. 322 (1979)
- Allen v. McCurry · 449 U.S. 90 (1980)
- Taylor v. Sturgell · 553 U.S. 880 (2008)
- Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp. · 456 U.S. 461 (1982)
- Brown v. Felsen · 442 U.S. 127 (1979)
- Lawlor v. National Screen Service Corp. · 349 U.S. 322 (1955)
- United States v. Tohono O’odham Nation · 563 U.S. 307 (2011)
- Cromwell v. County of Sac · 94 U.S. 351 (1877)
- Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt · 579 U.S. 582 (2016)
Official text
Read the official opinion (PDF, supremecourt.gov)
Explore from here
Sonia Sotomayor’s profile · All Supreme Court opinions · The Supreme Court
Source: Supreme Court of the United States, slip opinions (2020). Citation count from the Free Law Project’s CourtListener bulk data. Data last verified 2026-08-15. Informational only; verify against the primary source before relying. Not a consumer report (FCRA).