Genzmer v. Public Health Trust of Miami-Dade County

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding “[w]hat matters is that Genzmer performed the work during the time period in which he was employed by the Trust to complete the research program” when party argued “he wrote the software at issue in his home, using his home computer, during off-duty hours”
• computer program written by postgraduate physician as assigned research project during his fellowship at county hospital was work for hire; therefore, copyright was owned by hospital
• computer program was actuated to serve the employer where it was tailored to fit the employer’s needs and, once complete, it was used by the employer
• employee was required to undertake a research assignment that encompassed ”a myriad of activities” and the evidence showed that at times such research included the drafting of computer programs
• creation of computer program by doctor undertaking research project within scope of employment
• “Although it is true that the plaintiff in this case was hired as a doctor, not as a computer programmer, it does not necessarily follow that writing a computer program is not the type of work Genzmer was employed to perform.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).