Marvel Characters, Inc., Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellee v. Joseph H. Simon, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellant

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, under federal law, “[c]ollateral estoppel applies when: ‘(1) the identical issue was raised in a previous proceeding; (2) the issue was actually litigated and decided in the previous proceeding; (3
• noting that under the 1909 Act, “an author was entitled to a copyright in his work for twenty-eight years from the date of its publication”
• finding that “we may seek guidance in the legislative history and purpose of the statute” only when there is ambiguity
• noting that the court would apply “New York law in determining the preclusive effect of a New York State court judgment”
• testifying that there was a house a block away from Plaintiffs’ where there was a drug raid
• noting that the Copyright Act termination provisions “necessarily contemplate[] the likelihood that long-dormant copyright ownership issues will be awakened and litigated once the original . . . copyright term expires.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).