Downtown Art Co. v. Zimmerman
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered on or about February 5, 1996, which granted plaintiff’s motion to strike defendant’s jury demand, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Aside from its contract claims, the main relief plaintiff seeks is an injunction against defendant’s continuing her use of the Soho Booking name and logo. Defendant initially asserted a counterclaim for similar relief as against plaintiff, but withdrew it without prejudice. The IAS Court correctly held that "the primary character of the case” is equitable (Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft v Spinale, 177…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Murphy v. American Home Products Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
- Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft v. SpinaleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Zimmer-Masiello, Inc. v. Zimmer, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
3Cited by4 opinions
- Muhlstock v. ColeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Klein v. Loeb Holding Corp.New York Supreme Court · 2009
- Mulder v. DonaldsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- Ingenuit v. HarriffAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008