Philip Plotkin v. National Comics Publications, Inc., Wayne Boring, Columbia Pictures Corporation and Rko Theatres Corporation

Second Circuit

Philip Plotkin v. National Comics Publications, Inc., Wayne Boring, Columbia Pictures Corporation and Rko Theatres Corporation

217 F.2d 332, 103 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 336, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 4690

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided November 26, 1954·No. 30, Docket 22997·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff challenges the dismissal of his suit for infringement of his copyrighted comics character, Atoman, and for misuse of confidential information relating thereto. Judge Ryan’s finding that plaintiff’s conception, Atoman, was neither original nor infringed by defendant’s independently produced movie, Atom Man v. Superman, is supported by substantial evidence, Darrell v. Joe Morris Music Co., 2 Cir., 113 F.2d 80, and is in accord with prior decisions of this court. Arnstein v. Edward B. Marks Music Corp., 2 Cir., 82 F.2d 275; Warner Bros. Pictures v. Majestic Pictures Corp., 2 Cir., 70 F.2d 310. We also concur in the trial judge’s conclusion that plaintiff’s disclosures to defendants concerning Atoman were not made in circumstances of implied contract or trust so as to support an action for unfair competition.

Plaintiff’s only new allegation •on this appeal is his contention of prejudicial hostility on the part of the trial judge. The basis alleged for such prejudice is too trivial to warrant further consideration, and the judge’s conduct of the trial was proper. Plaintiff refused several opportunities before the announcement of the decision to ask for a mistrial. The judge’s active interrogation of witnesses in this non-jury trial was within his discretion. Bissonette v. National Biscuit Co., 2 Cir., 100 F.2d 1003; Pariser v. City of New York, 2 Cir., 146 F.2d 431, 433.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff challenges the dismissal of his suit for infringement of his copyrighted comics character, Atoman, and for misuse of confidential information relating thereto. Judge Ryan’s finding that plaintiff’s conception, Atoman, was neither original nor infringed by defendant’s independently produced movie, Atom Man v. Superman, is supported by substantial evidence, Darrell v. Joe Morris Music Co., 2 Cir., 113 F.2d 80, and is in accord with prior decisions of this court. Arnstein v. Edward B. Marks Music Corp., 2 Cir., 82 F.2d 275; Warner Bros. Pictures v. Majestic Pictures Corp., 2 Cir., 70 F.2d 310. We also concur in the trial judge’s conclusion that plaintiff’s disclosures to defendants concerning Atoman were not made in circumstances of implied contract or trust so as to support an action for unfair competition.

Plaintiff’s only new allegation •on this appeal is his contention of prejudicial hostility on the part of the trial judge. The basis alleged for such prejudice is too trivial to warrant further consideration, and the judge’s conduct of the trial was proper. Plaintiff refused several opportunities before the announcement of the decision to ask for a mistrial. The judge’s active interrogation of witnesses in this non-jury trial was within his discretion. Bissonette v. National Biscuit Co., 2 Cir., 100 F.2d 1003; Pariser v. City of New York, 2 Cir., 146 F.2d 431, 433.

Affirmed.

Philip Plotkin v. National Comics Publications, Inc., Wayne Boring, Columbia Pictures Corporation and Rko Theatres Corporation, 217 F.2d 332, 103 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 336, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 4690 (2d Cir. 1954).

Pincite

217 F.2d 332 (Philip Plotkin v. National Comics Publications, Inc., Wayne Boring, Columbia Pictures Corporation and Rko Theatres Corporation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related