Legal Opinion
Maryland Manger v. Kree Institute of Electrolysis, Inc. And Garo Artinian
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided May 3, 1956No. 303, Docket 23967PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FRANK, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiff sued defendants for violation of her “right of privacy” granted by Section 51 of the New York Civil Rights Law, McK.Consol.Laws, c. 6. 1 The case was tried to a jury which returned a general verdict for plaintiff.
There was evidence from which the jury could reasonably have found, and which we must assume they found, the following: The defendant, Kree Institute, is a corporation engaged in the teaching of electrolysis and the sale of electrolysis equipment for the permanent removal of superfluous hair from the body, known in the trade as “Radiomatic.” Defendant…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Roberson v. . Rochester Folding Box Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1902
- Gautier v. Pro-Football, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1952
- Haelan Laboratories, Inc. v. Topps Chewing Gum, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1953
- Binns v. Vitagraph Co. of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1913
- Eick v. Perk Dog Food Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1952
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Ali v. Playgirl, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1978
- Paulsen v. Personality Posters, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1968
- Daniel Fetler v. Houghton Mifflin CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1966
- Russell v. BooksNew York Supreme Court · 1959
- Herbert S. Zim v. Western Publishing CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1978
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.