Brady v. Blackett-Sample-Hummert, Inc.

New York Court of Appeals

Brady v. Blackett-Sample-Hummert, Inc.

32 N.E.2d 830, 285 N.Y. 540, 1941 N.Y. LEXIS 1575

New York Court of Appeals·Decided January 23, 1941·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Motion for reargument and to amend remittitur denied, without costs.

On the appeal we decided only that, even assuming .that the plaintiff is a part owner in the play or has an equitable *541 title to the copyright and that the defendants had notice of his rights, no cause of action arising from breach of duty of, or abuse of, a fiduciary relation, cognizable by the courts of this State, in accordance with the principles formulated in Underhill v. Schenk (238 N. Y. 7), has been established against these defendants who acted under license from the record owner of the copyright. (See 284 N. Y. 635.)

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

Motion for reargument and to amend remittitur denied, without costs.

On the appeal we decided only that, even assuming .that the plaintiff is a part owner in the play or has an equitable *541 title to the copyright and that the defendants had notice of his rights, no cause of action arising from breach of duty of, or abuse of, a fiduciary relation, cognizable by the courts of this State, in accordance with the principles formulated in Underhill v. Schenk (238 N. Y. 7), has been established against these defendants who acted under license from the record owner of the copyright. (See 284 N. Y. 635.)

Brady v. Blackett-Sample-Hummert, Inc., 32 N.E.2d 830, 285 N.Y. 540, 1941 N.Y. LEXIS 1575 (N.Y. 1941).

Pincite

32 N.E.2d 830 (Brady v. Blackett-Sample-Hummert, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related