Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Frith
645 F.2d 6
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1981-05-14
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- holding defendants have no right to jury trial in copyright action where plaintiffs seek only statutory damages and injunctive relief
- holding defendants have no right to jury trial in copyright action where plaintiffs seek only statutory damages and injunc-tive relief
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Frith. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 31 opinions
TWENTIETH CENTURY MUSIC CORP. v. FRITH,645 F.2d 6(5th Cir. 1981)
TWENTIETH CENTURY MUSIC CORP., HOUSE OF WEISS MUSIC CO., LEWIS MUSIC
PUBLISHING CO., INC., CHESS MUSIC INC., MILENE MUSIC, INC., CHAPPELL CO.,
INC., AND PIC CORP., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES, v. CURTIS FRITH AND CARLTON LEE
DAVIS, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.
STONEBRIDGE MUSIC AND BLUE MOON MUSIC, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES, v. CURTIS FRITH
AND CARLTON LEE DAVIS, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.
DOUBLE R MUSIC CORPORATION, CHAPPELL COMPANY, INC., MILENE MUSIC, INC.,
AND MCA, INC., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES, v. CURTIS FRITH AND CARLTON LEE DAVIS,
DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.
Nos. 80-7653, 80-7654 and 80-7655
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Unit B.
May 14, 1981.
Smith, Cohen, Ringel, Kohler Martin, I. T. Cohen, Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiffs-appellees.
Before HILL, FAY and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
I.
[2] In total the three actions, consolidated by agreement of the parties, alleged thirteen copyright infringements of appellees' musical compositions by public performance for profit at the Juwan Knight Club, Columbus, Georgia in 1977 and 1978. The appellants are the owner and manager of the Club at which these musical compositions were performed as part of the entertainment regularly provided. Some of the musical compositions which are the subject of this action were performed by a live orchestra, others by recordings played on a jukebox. Patrons of the Club were required to pay an admission charge for entrance to the Club and for the entertainment provided.Page 7
[3] Appellants demanded trial by jury. Appellees moved to strike the jury demands and simultaneously filed stipulations waiving any claim for damages above the statutory minimum and for injunctive relief. The District Court granted appellees' motion, and found that their copyrights had been infringed. The Court issued a permanent injunction against further infringement, awarded the minimum statutory damages of $250 for each infringement and attorneys' fees totaling $2,100.00, noting that only one hearing had been required to dispose of the cases. It is not suggested that the Court lacked adequate evidential support for its determination. The only question raised is the propriety of the Court's order.
II.
[4] This appeal seems to present very simple questions. Appellant argues that this appeal is governed by the principles ofBeaconTheatres, Inc. v. Westover,359 U.S. 500,79 S.Ct. 948,3 L.Ed.2d 988(1959) andDairy Queen, Inc. v. Wood,369 U.S. 469,82 S.Ct. 894,8 L.Ed.2d 44(1962). We find their arguments unpersuasive in light ofRoss v. Bernhard,396 U.S. 531,90 S.Ct. 733,24 L.Ed.2d 729(1970).See BMI v. Papa John's Inc.,201 U.S.P.Q. 302 (N.D.Ind. 1979);Cayman Music Ltd. v.Reichenberger,403 F. Supp. 794(W.D.Wis. 1975). The whole case before the Court was equitable in nature as to which the appellant had no constitutional or statutory right to a jury trial.See Chappell Co. v. Palermo Cafe Co.,249 F.2d 77,78(1st Cir. 1957);BMI v. Dici Naz Velleggia,490 F. Supp. 1342(D.Md. 1980).
[5] Appellant's contention that the award of attorney's fees was excessive appears frivolous. The Court, in its order, clearly indicated a consideration of the circumstances had been made and its award of $2,100.00 does not constitute an abuse of discretion.
[6] The judgment of the District Court is Affirmed.Page 252