Legal Opinion
Goldwyn Pictures Corp. v. Howells Sales Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided January 30, 1923No. 169PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHough, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). Upon the previous appeal this court held that the then sole plaintiff, Goldwyn Company, had (under the copyright statute [26 Stat. 1106]) no cause of action, because it owned no copyright. But, although the corporation that brought suit had no right to sue, we thought it might obtain such right, and therefore left the case open. It now appears- that Goldwyn Company, having discovered in Stephens the copyright proprietor, did not itself acquire the copyright, but literacy hired Stephens to lend his name to this litigation; he assigning in advance to Goldwyn…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Potts v. CreagerSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Smith v. Vulcan Iron WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- In Re PottsSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Grable v. KillitsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1922
- Cashman v. Amador & Sacramento Canal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1886
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Thornton v. CarterCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1940
- Reserve Mining Co. v. Environmental Protection AgencyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1975
- Ex Parte EdelsteinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- R. C. Paull, Virginia Paull and Paull's Hatchery, Inc. v. Archer-Daniels-Midland CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1963
- Stephens v. Howells Sales Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1926
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.