Sonya Jason v. Jane Fonda

Ninth Circuit

Sonya Jason v. Jane Fonda

698 F.2d 966, 217 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 406, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 23690

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedDecember 1, 1982

Docket81-5973

StatusPublished

Cited by50 cases

This text of 698 F.2d 966 (Sonya Jason v. Jane Fonda) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sonya Jason v. Jane Fonda, 698 F.2d 966, 217 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 406, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 23690 (9th Cir. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

J. BLAINE ANDERSON, Circuit Judge:

Sonya Jason brought an action against Jane Fonda and eight other defendants for copyright infringement, unfair competition, misappropriation, and breach of implied contract. Mrs. Jason’s primary allegation was that the defendants’ motion picture, Coming Home, infringed on the copyright in her novel, Concomitant Soldier — Woman and War. The district court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismissed the other claims. We affirm.

*967 Our review of the facts and issues leads us to concur in the well-reasoned decision of Judge Kelleher filed September 21, 1981. 526 F.Supp. 774 (C.D.Cal.1982). We therefore incorporate his memorandum of decision by reference. Judge Kelleher aptly points out:

(1) Mrs. Jason presented evidence showing no more than a “bare possibility” the defendants had access to her work. Such a showing is insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact. See British Airways Board v. Boeing Company, 585 F.2d 946, 952 (9th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 981 [99 S.Ct. 1790, 60 L.Ed.2d 241] (1979);

(2) Even assuming access, there was no substantial similarity between the two works under the standards announced by this court in Sid & Marty Krofft Television Productions, Inc. v. McDonald’s Corp., 562 F.2d 1157 (9th Cir.1977); and

(3) It is proper to dismiss pendent state claims when the federal claim is dismissed prior to trial. Wham-O Mfg. Co. v. Paradise Manufacturing Co., 327 F.2d 748, 753 (9th Cir.1964); see also, Wren v. Sletten Construction Co., 654 F.2d 529, 536 (9th Cir.1981).

Additionally, Judge Kelleher did not abuse his discretion in handling discovery nor in denying Mrs. Jason’s motion for reconsideration.

The appellees’ request for sanctions and attorney’s fees is denied. Single costs are allowed.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

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

J. BLAINE ANDERSON, Circuit Judge:

Sonya Jason brought an action against Jane Fonda and eight other defendants for copyright infringement, unfair competition, misappropriation, and breach of implied contract. Mrs. Jason’s primary allegation was that the defendants’ motion picture, Coming Home, infringed on the copyright in her novel, Concomitant Soldier — Woman and War. The district court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismissed the other claims. We affirm.

*967 Our review of the facts and issues leads us to concur in the well-reasoned decision of Judge Kelleher filed September 21, 1981. 526 F.Supp. 774 (C.D.Cal.1982). We therefore incorporate his memorandum of decision by reference. Judge Kelleher aptly points out:

(1) Mrs. Jason presented evidence showing no more than a “bare possibility” the defendants had access to her work. Such a showing is insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact. See British Airways Board v. Boeing Company, 585 F.2d 946, 952 (9th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 981 [99 S.Ct. 1790, 60 L.Ed.2d 241] (1979);

(2) Even assuming access, there was no substantial similarity between the two works under the standards announced by this court in Sid & Marty Krofft Television Productions, Inc. v. McDonald’s Corp., 562 F.2d 1157 (9th Cir.1977); and

(3) It is proper to dismiss pendent state claims when the federal claim is dismissed prior to trial. Wham-O Mfg. Co. v. Paradise Manufacturing Co., 327 F.2d 748, 753 (9th Cir.1964); see also, Wren v. Sletten Construction Co., 654 F.2d 529, 536 (9th Cir.1981).

Additionally, Judge Kelleher did not abuse his discretion in handling discovery nor in denying Mrs. Jason’s motion for reconsideration.

The appellees’ request for sanctions and attorney’s fees is denied. Single costs are allowed.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

698 F.2d 966, 217 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 406, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 23690, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sonya-jason-v-jane-fonda-ca9-1982.

Opinion

J. BLAINE ANDERSON, Circuit Judge:

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack