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
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedNovember 26, 1954
Docket30, Docket 22997
StatusPublished

This text of 217 F.2d 332 (Philip Plotkin v. National Comics Publications, Inc., Wayne Boring, Columbia Pictures Corporation and Rko Theatres Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
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).

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

Related

Bissonette v. National Biscuit Co.
100 F.2d 1003 (Second Circuit, 1939)
Arnstein v. Edward B. Marks Music Corporation
82 F.2d 275 (Second Circuit, 1936)
Darrell v. Joe Morris Music Co.
113 F.2d 80 (Second Circuit, 1940)
Pariser v. City of New York
146 F.2d 431 (Second Circuit, 1945)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
217 F.2d 332, 103 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 336, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 4690, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/philip-plotkin-v-national-comics-publications-inc-wayne-boring-ca2-1954.