Legal Opinion
American Cyanamid Co. v. Picaso-Anstalt
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided July 10, 1990No. Civ. A. 90-1424(MTB)PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BARRY, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs American Cyanamid Company (“American Cyanamid”) and Shulton, Inc. (“Shulton”) filed this action on April 12, 1990 seeking declaratory, injunctive and monetary relief against Pieaso-Anstalt (“Picaso”) and Pierre Cardin (“Cardin”) for their allegedly improper termination of a 1977 licensing agreement (“Licensing Agreement”) and guarantee (“Guarantee”) granting Shulton the right to manufacture and sell products bearing Cardin’s name.
More specifically, Shulton seeks declaratory relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201, asking the Court to declare…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Gulf Oil Corp. v. GilbertSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Piper Aircraft Co. v. ReynoSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Fay v. NoiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Darr v. BurfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Van Cauwenberghe v. BiardSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Weikel v. Tower Semiconductor Ltd.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1998
- Burke v. QuarteyDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1997
- Miller v. Boston Scientific Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2005
- Tonnemacher v. Touche Ross & Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1996
- TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD. v. OnischenkoDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2007
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.