Legal Opinion
Galloping, Inc. v. QVC, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided November 23, 1998No. 97 Civ. 4554(MGC)PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
CEDARBAUM, District Judge.
After a four day trial, a jury found QYC liable to Galloping, Inc. (“Galloping”) in the amount of $200,000 for breach of a Licensing Agreement. QVC moves pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 50(b) for judgment as a matter of law, and, in the alternative, pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 59(e) to amend the judgment as contrary to law. Galloping moves pursuant to Rule 59(e) to amend the judgment to include prejudgment interest. For the reasons that follow, QVC’s motion is denied and Galloping’s motion is granted.
DISCUSSION
1. QVC’s Rule 50(b) Motion
QVC contends, as it…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Ashland Management Inc. v. JanienNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
- Kenford Co. v. County of ErieNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Sir Speedy, Inc. v. L & P Graphics, Inc., Neil H. Blatte and Business Service Centers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992
- S & K Sales Co. v. Nike, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
- Care Travel Company, Ltd. v. Pan American World Airways, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1991
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Stanford Square, L.L.C. v. Nomura Asset Capital Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 2002
- The Upper Deck Co., LLC v. Breakey Intern., BvDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2005
- Gold v. Ziff Communications Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2001
- MacQuesten General Contracting, Inc. v. HCE, INC.District Court, S.D. New York · 2003
- Gem Financial Service, Inc. v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2023
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.