Legal Opinion
Smith v. Weinstein
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided January 24, 1984No. 80 Civ. 7057(ADS)PublishedCited by 56 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
SOFAER, District Judge.
Plaintiff Andrew Smith, a professional comedy writer, asserts in this action that defendants Hannah Weinstein, Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. (“Columbia”), and various persons engaged by Columbia to write, produce, and direct the movie “Stir Crazy” illegally used plaintiff’s original ideas and expression in making the film. The court has jurisdiction of the copyright infringement and unfair competition claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a) and (b). Invoking the theory of pendent jurisdiction, plaintiff joins with his federal claims related state law…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Hagans v. LavineSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Rosado v. WymanSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Hurn v. OurslerSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Quinn v. Syracuse Model Neighborhood Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by56 opinions
- Forest Park Pictures v. Universal Television Network, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2012
- Norton J. Lehman v. Dow Jones & Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1986
- Mayer v. Josiah Wedgwood & Sons, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 1985
- Taquino v. Teledyne Monarch RubberCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1990
- Lennon v. SeamanDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1999
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.