Berlitz Schools of Languages of America v. Everest House case
brief summary
619 F.2d 211 (1980)
CASE FACTS
Plaintiffs commenced an action against defendants seeking equitable and monetary relief for trademark infringement and unfair competition under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.S. §§ 1051 et seq., and for unfair competition and trademark dilution under New York State law. The suit was triggered by defendants' publication of a series of foreign language instructional books by author. Plaintiffs moved, by order to show cause, to enjoin the publication of the series pending trial on the merits. The district court found that plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a probability of success on the merits and accordingly denied the motion. Defendants moved for summary judgment on the ground that in light of judgments entered against plaintiff in three prior state court proceedings, brought by plaintiffs against author, the action was barred under the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel. The district court granted the motions, and the court of appeals affirmed.
CONCLUSION
Summary judgment affirmed; plaintiffs had litigated the same factual claims and issues against author in state court; therefore, they were barred under the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel from re-litigating the same claims and issues in federal court.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
619 F.2d 211 (1980)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Plaintiffs appealed from an order of
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York, denying preliminary injunctive relief and entering summary
judgment for defendants on plaintiffs' Lanham Act claims.CASE FACTS
Plaintiffs commenced an action against defendants seeking equitable and monetary relief for trademark infringement and unfair competition under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.S. §§ 1051 et seq., and for unfair competition and trademark dilution under New York State law. The suit was triggered by defendants' publication of a series of foreign language instructional books by author. Plaintiffs moved, by order to show cause, to enjoin the publication of the series pending trial on the merits. The district court found that plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a probability of success on the merits and accordingly denied the motion. Defendants moved for summary judgment on the ground that in light of judgments entered against plaintiff in three prior state court proceedings, brought by plaintiffs against author, the action was barred under the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel. The district court granted the motions, and the court of appeals affirmed.
CONCLUSION
Summary judgment affirmed; plaintiffs had litigated the same factual claims and issues against author in state court; therefore, they were barred under the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel from re-litigating the same claims and issues in federal court.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
No comments:
Post a Comment