Skip to main content
Supreme Court· 10/7/2013

Woerner v. United States

Citations

  • 134 S. Ct. 146
  • 187 L. Ed. 2d 103
  • 82 U.S.L.W. 3182
  • 571 U.S. 859
  • 2013 WL 2458362
  • 2013 U.S. LEXIS 5692

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that “Plaintiffs did not have reasonable notice that Defendants had filed a [copyright] registration in the capacity of employer for hire.”
  • “The claim accrues only once, when a reasonably diligent plaintiff would have been put on inquiry as to the existence of a right.”
  • copyright registration did not repudiate authorship claim because nominal authors did not have reasonable notice of the nature of the registration
  • “at least three types of events [] can put a potential plaintiff on notice and thereby trigger the accrual of an ownership claim”
  • “The three-year limitations period applies to ownership claims.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.