Academy Reproduction Corp. v. Finelli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Academy Reproduction Corp. v. Finelli

23 A.D.2d 767, 258 N.Y.S.2d 493, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4445

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 12, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 23 A.D.2d 767 (Academy Reproduction Corp. v. Finelli) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Academy Reproduction Corp. v. Finelli, 23 A.D.2d 767, 258 N.Y.S.2d 493, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4445 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

In a special summary proceeding pursuant to statute (Penal Law, § 964), brought by petitioner, Academy Reproductions Corporation, to enjoin Salvator Finelli from using the trade name “ Academy Reproductions ” in his business, the said Finelli appeals from a judgment (erroneously designated as an order) of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered December 1, 1964 upon the court’s decision, which granted the application. Judgment (order) reversed on the law and the facts, without costs, and application denied, without costs, and without prejudice to such other proceeding or action as petitioner may be advised. The findings of fact implicit in the decision of the Special Term, insofar as they may be inconsistent herewith, are reversed, and new findings are made as indicated herein. The summary relief authorised by section 964 of the Penn! Daw shouW [768]*768be invoked only when there is such conclusive evidence of intent to deceive the public that the absence of any factual issue would, in an appropriate case, authorize a summary judgment (Association of Contr. Plumbers v. Contracting Plumbers Assn., 302 N. Y. 495, 502; Matter of Industrial Plants Corp. v. Industrial Liquidating Co., 286 App. Div. 568, 571). In our opinion, the petitioner here failed to sustain such burden (cf. Matter of Technical Color é Chem. Works V. Felkay, 21 A D 2d 787; Matter of Ityan é Son v. Lancaster Homes, 19 A D 2d 14). Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Hill, Rabin and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In a special summary proceeding pursuant to statute (Penal Law, § 964), brought by petitioner, Academy Reproductions Corporation, to enjoin Salvator Finelli from using the trade name “ Academy Reproductions ” in his business, the said Finelli appeals from a judgment (erroneously designated as an order) of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered December 1, 1964 upon the court’s decision, which granted the application. Judgment (order) reversed on the law and the facts, without costs, and application denied, without costs, and without prejudice to such other proceeding or action as petitioner may be advised. The findings of fact implicit in the decision of the Special Term, insofar as they may be inconsistent herewith, are reversed, and new findings are made as indicated herein. The summary relief authorised by section 964 of the Penn! Daw shouW [768]*768be invoked only when there is such conclusive evidence of intent to deceive the public that the absence of any factual issue would, in an appropriate case, authorize a summary judgment (Association of Contr. Plumbers v. Contracting Plumbers Assn., 302 N. Y. 495, 502; Matter of Industrial Plants Corp. v. Industrial Liquidating Co., 286 App. Div. 568, 571). In our opinion, the petitioner here failed to sustain such burden (cf. Matter of Technical Color é Chem. Works V. Felkay, 21 A D 2d 787; Matter of Ityan é Son v. Lancaster Homes, 19 A D 2d 14). Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Hill, Rabin and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 767, 258 N.Y.S.2d 493, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4445, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/academy-reproduction-corp-v-finelli-nyappdiv-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack