Wolf v. Illustrated World Encyclopedia, Inc.

New York Court of Appeals

Wolf v. Illustrated World Encyclopedia, Inc.

316 N.E.2d 342, 34 N.Y.2d 834, 359 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1974 N.Y. LEXIS 1499

DecidedJune 13, 1974

StatusPublished

This text of 316 N.E.2d 342 (Wolf v. Illustrated World Encyclopedia, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wolf v. Illustrated World Encyclopedia, Inc., 316 N.E.2d 342, 34 N.Y.2d 834, 359 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1974 N.Y. LEXIS 1499 (N.Y. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Memobandum. We affirm the order of the Appellate Division.

As to appellant publisher’s affirmative defense based on alleged breach of contract on the part of respondent illustrator-designer, we note that as appellant must have been aware, respondent for some years had been professionally engaged in editorial, art and illustration work for encyclopedias and other publications. Yet the contract between the parties contained no express negative covenant or other provision restricting respondent’s freedom to continue to work in the field generally. Nor under the circumstances here can any such negative or restrictive agreement be implied. Appellant publisher received the illustrations which respondent agreed to prepare and for which appellant agreed to pay. If appellant had sought to limit respondent’s freedom to make duplicate or similar illustrations available to other publishers, a provision appropriate to that [836]*836end should have been proposed for inclusion in respondent’s contract.

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Rabin concur in a memorandum; Judge Stevens taking no part.

Order affirmed, with costs.

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

Memobandum. We affirm the order of the Appellate Division.

As to appellant publisher’s affirmative defense based on alleged breach of contract on the part of respondent illustrator-designer, we note that as appellant must have been aware, respondent for some years had been professionally engaged in editorial, art and illustration work for encyclopedias and other publications. Yet the contract between the parties contained no express negative covenant or other provision restricting respondent’s freedom to continue to work in the field generally. Nor under the circumstances here can any such negative or restrictive agreement be implied. Appellant publisher received the illustrations which respondent agreed to prepare and for which appellant agreed to pay. If appellant had sought to limit respondent’s freedom to make duplicate or similar illustrations available to other publishers, a provision appropriate to that [836]*836end should have been proposed for inclusion in respondent’s contract.

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Rabin concur in a memorandum; Judge Stevens taking no part.

Order affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

316 N.E.2d 342, 34 N.Y.2d 834, 359 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1974 N.Y. LEXIS 1499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wolf-v-illustrated-world-encyclopedia-inc-ny-1974.