Gilroy v. American Broadcasting Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gilroy v. American Broadcasting Co.

47 A.D.2d 728, 365 N.Y.S.2d 193, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8981

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

DecidedMarch 6, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 47 A.D.2d 728 (Gilroy v. American Broadcasting Co.) 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

Gilroy v. American Broadcasting Co., 47 A.D.2d 728, 365 N.Y.S.2d 193, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8981 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on January 28, 1972, in favor of plaintiff, after a jury trial, unanimously modified on the law and on the facts, to the extent of remanding the matter for a new trial only on the issue of damages, including punitive damages, if any, and otherwise affirmed. Plaintiff-appellant-respondent shall recover of defendants-respondents-appellants one bill of $60 costs and disbursements of these cross appeals. The trial court erred in excluding the testimony offered by plaintiff and his expert witness, by which plaintiff sought to establish the reasonable value of the literary character created by him and misappropriated by defendants and in limiting plaintiff’s recovery to defendants’ profits. The proper measure of damages flowing from defendants’ wrongful appropriation of plaintiff’s literary property is the reasonable value thereof and “ Opinion evidence of the value of the property” is admissible. (Bobbins v. Frank Cooper Assoc., 14 N Y 2d 913, 915.) Concur — Stevens, J. P., Lupiano, Capozzoli and Lane, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on January 28, 1972, in favor of plaintiff, after a jury trial, unanimously modified on the law and on the facts, to the extent of remanding the matter for a new trial only on the issue of damages, including punitive damages, if any, and otherwise affirmed. Plaintiff-appellant-respondent shall recover of defendants-respondents-appellants one bill of $60 costs and disbursements of these cross appeals. The trial court erred in excluding the testimony offered by plaintiff and his expert witness, by which plaintiff sought to establish the reasonable value of the literary character created by him and misappropriated by defendants and in limiting plaintiff’s recovery to defendants’ profits. The proper measure of damages flowing from defendants’ wrongful appropriation of plaintiff’s literary property is the reasonable value thereof and “ Opinion evidence of the value of the property” is admissible. (Bobbins v. Frank Cooper Assoc., 14 N Y 2d 913, 915.) Concur — Stevens, J. P., Lupiano, Capozzoli and Lane, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 A.D.2d 728, 365 N.Y.S.2d 193, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8981, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilroy-v-american-broadcasting-co-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack