The Court Of Appeals Affirmed The Dismissal - 1573 Words

The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal. The court concluded that even though there were â€Å"identical floor areas, number of parking spaces, the provision of a public plaza, the use of public art, and the orientation of the buildings to ensure water views,† many of these were standard features for high-rise developments and could not be protected because they were simply abstract ideas. Furthermore, there were differences between the two designs including the dimensions of a glass roof on the building, the absence of ornamental ribbons in the defendant’s design, and additional balconies that were not present in the plaintiff’s designs. The court viewed these differences as substantial enough so that no reasonable person would view the structures as being substantially similar. As such, the court concluded that even in the pleading stages of litigation (before discovery), the trial court did not err in dismissing the claim. Peter highlights the courts’ general unwillingness to recognize infringement of architectural works. There was no doubt that the defendant in Peter had access to the plaintiff’s plans (they worked together previously), and there were certainly some overt similarities in the two developments. However, the court would not even allow the plaintiff the benefit of discovery because, in its view, the differences were too substantial. While making such a fact intensive determination at the pleading stage may be somewhat brash, the nature of â€Å"thin†Show MoreRelatedFacts And Procedural History : Indianas Newborn Screening Program1576 Words   |  7 PagesThe trial court denied the request for a preliminary injunction and later granted the motion to dismiss on the same grounds asserted by ISDH. Doe appealed raising three issues, but the Court of Appeals found only one dispositive: whether the trial court erred when it determined that Doe has not sustained, nor was she in immediate danger of sustaining, a direct injury as a result of the storage of her dried blood spot sample, and, therefore, she lacked standing. Writing for a unanimous Court of AppealsRead MoreFourteenth Amendment Taking Of Real Property1309 Words   |  6 Pagesthe Defendant is not a person and under the personnel rules only a person can appeal a finding of fact and ruling of Law from the OAH. 22) Plaintiff was also harassed, stalked, lied about under oath, lied about, treated unfairly, treated with hostility in the workplace, defamed, assaulted, his good name destroyed, harassed, and career destroyed. 23) Plaintiff was wrongfully terminated on June 5, 2007. Jim Uzzell affirmed he would testify truthfully at the unemployment hearing, and then lied underRead MoreCase Brief Essay example711 Words   |  3 PagesMONTGOMERY United States Courts of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit 718 F.2d 1033 (11th Cir. 1983) Facts: Jimmy Maddox was convicted of rape in a Georgia state court and sentenced to life imprisonment. Having unsuccessfully pursued his direct appeal and the state post-conviction remedy, Maddox filed a federal habeasRead MoreThe Acquired Rights Directive 77 / 187 / Eec1667 Words   |  7 Pagesinteresting to note the House of Lords in the select Committee Report on the Amended Directive, 1996 affirmed this approach (Hardy, 1996). Although the case of d’Urso v. Ercole [1992] was considered in the context of Italian law, the judgment differentiated between special administration proceedings with the intention of liquidation and continued trading whereby the rescue attempt was under the direction of a court appointed administrator, which was definitely within the scope of the Acquired Rights DirectiveRead MoreThe Case Of Pedigo V.2162 Words   |  9 PagesIn the case of Pedigo v. P.A.M. Transp., 891 F. Supp. 482, 485 (W.D. Ark. 1994), rev g, 60 F.3d 1300 (8th Cir. 1995), â€Å"The court advised that the ADA as it was being interpreted had the potential of being the greatest generator of litigation ever. Also, that the court doubted whether Congress, in its wildest dreams or wildest nightmares, intended to turn every garden-variety worker s compensation claim into a federal case. Based on statistical data from the Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionRead MoreOcc Is A Maryland Corporation1288 Words   |  6 Pagesaction (the â€Å"first action†) against OCC and Hoff. The record reflects only that the parties stipulated to a dismissal with prejudice of this action on March 22, 2013. Hanover avers that the issue of whether Volkman was terminated for good cause was the pivotal issue in both the first action and the declaratory judgment action which is the subject of this appeal. Aside from the stipulated dismissal, however, the record is void as to the substance of the claims or any adjudications rendered in the firstRead MoreV. St. Louis Hockey Clu b1617 Words   |  7 Pagesstoppage. After the injury, the defendant’s player received a game misconduct and a suspension. The player would also go on to settle with the plaintiff out of court. In the district court trial, the jury sided with the plaintiff and ruled that the St. Louis Hockey Club was vicariously liable for the plaintiff’s injuries. The trial court agreed with the plaintiff’s argument that as per the doctrine of respondeat superior, the defendant was liable for their employee’s negligent actions that led toRead Morecases on labor law9442 Words   |  38 Pagesemployer-employee relationship, this is the first time that the Court will resolve the nature of the relationship between a television and radio station and one of its â€Å"talents.† There is no case law stating that a radio and television program host is an employee of the broadcast station. Applying the control test to the present case, we find that SONZA is not an employee but an independent contractor. The control test is the most important test our courts apply in distinguishing an employee from an independentRead MoreDepartment Of Agriculture V. Moreno Essay1462 Words   |  6 Pagesreview that allowed the court to examine legislative history in order to determine the legislature’s actual purpose. An amendment to the Food Stamp Act of 1964 excluded households containing unrelated members from participating in the federal food stamp program. This class was effectively denied federal food assistance. The District Court for the District of Columbia held that this classification violated the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process clause, and the Supreme Court affirmed. The governmentRead MoreVizconde Massacre1345 Words   |  6 Pagesan accessory for destroying evidence in the crime. He was sentenced to eleven years in prison. The Court of Appeals Third Division voted 3-2 to deny Webb’s motion for reconsideration and upheld the ruling of Judge Tolentino on December 16, 2005. The court ruled that the Paraňaque RTC was correct in sentencing Webb due to â€Å"overwhelming evidence† that showed Webb and the other accused. The court also amended the award of damages from 100,000 pesos to 200,00 pesos and also upheld the correction of