Legal Opinion
Neiman-Marcus v. Lait
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided December 15, 1952PublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
IRVING R. KAUFMAN, District Judge.
The defendants have moved to dismiss the amended complaint in this action (1.) as to those plaintiffs described as salesmen and saleswomen for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and (2) in its entirety for failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., or in the alternative to require plaintiffs to serve an amended complaint in which the claim of each plaintiff shall be separately stated.
The defendants are authors of a book entitled “U.S.A. Confidential”. The plaintiffs are the Neiman-Marcus Company, a Texas…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- California Apparel Creators v. Wieder of California, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
- Oppenheimer v. F. J. Young & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- Kainz v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1952
- Mattox v. News Syndicate Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1949
- Gross v. CantorNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Melanie Geisler v. Orlando R. Petrocelli and Pinnacle Books, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
- Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. American Legacy FoundationSupreme Court of Delaware · 2006
- Blatty v. New York Times Co.California Supreme Court · 1986
- Barger v. Playboy Enterprises, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 1983
- Mick v. American Dental Assn.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1958
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.