Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Meredith Corp. v. Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc.

500 F.2d 1221

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1974-07-08
Topic
intellectual-property-and-technology

PER CURIAM: The appellants assert error in the grant of a preliminary injunction. This is essentially a dispute between the publishers of competing textbooks in the child development field. The defendants-appellees, seeking redress as copyright holders, convinced Judge Owen upon a persuasive factual record that they would probably succeed on the merits, that the appellants had plagiarized their textbook, and that there was need for immediate relief. There was a sufficient basis for the findings and conclusions of the District Court and since they are not clearly erroneous, Fed.R. Civ.P. 52(a), we affirm.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Meredith Corp. v. Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
7 opinions
MEREDITH CORP. v. HARPER ROW, PUBLISHERS,500 F.2d 1221(2nd Cir. 1974)
MEREDITH CORPORATION, AN IOWA CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. HARPER
ROW, PUBLISHERS, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES,
BRIAN SUTTON-SMITH, AN INDIVIDUAL, AND PRENTICE-HALL, INC., A DELAWARE
CORPORATION, ADDITIONAL DEFENDANTS ON COUNTER-CLAIM-APPELLANTS.
No. 1228, Docket 74-1726.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Argued June 26, 1974.
Decided July 8, 1974.
Marshall C. Berger, New York City (Hahn, Hessen, Margolis Ryan, New York City, Molinare, Allegretti, Newitt Witcoff, Chicago, Ill., William J. Daly, Jr., New York City, George B. Newitt, George P. McAndrews, Chicago, Ill., Wayne Carson, New York City, on the brief), for plaintiff-appellant and additional defendants-appellants.

John C. Lankenau, New York City (Lankenau, Kovner, Bickford Beer, Victor A. Kovner, Edward A. Miller, Nathaniel J. Bickford, New York City, on the brief), for defendants-appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Before MOORE and FEINBERG, Circuit Judges, and PALMIERI,fn*District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
[1] The appellants assert error in the grant of a preliminary injunction.

[2] This is essentially a dispute between the publishers of competing textbooks in the child development field. The defendants-appellees, seeking redress as copyright holders, convinced Judge Owen upon a persuasive factual record that they would probably succeed on the merits, that the appellants had plagiarized their textbook, and that there was need for immediate relief. There was a sufficient basis for the findings and conclusions of the District Court and since they are not clearly erroneous, Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a), we affirm.Page 1246
  1. Of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation. ↩