Subafilms, Ltd. The Hearst Corp., Plaintiffs-Counter-Defendants-Appellees v. Mgm-Pathe Communications Co., Fka Mgm/ua Communications Co. And as United Artists Corporation Mgm/ua Home Video, Inc. Warner Home Video, Inc. Warner Bros. Inc., Defendants-Counter-Claimants-Appellants. Subafilms, Ltd. The Hearst Corp. v. Mgm-Pathe Communications Co., Fka Mgm/ua Communications Co. And as United Artists Corporation Mgm/ua Home Video, Inc. Warner Home Video, Inc. Warner Bros. Inc. United Artists Corporation

Good Law
24 F.3d 1088·94 Daily Journal DAR 6457·30 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1746·1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 10604·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3381
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 13, 199491-56248California7,823 words

Opinion

Opinion

24 F.3d 1088 62 USLW 2709 , 1994 Copr.L.Dec. P 27,264 , 30 U.S.P.Q.2d 1746 SUBAFILMS, LTD.; The Hearst Corp., Plaintiffs-counter-defendants-Appellees, v. MGM-PATHE COMMUNICATIONS CO., fka MGM/UA Communications Co. and as United Artists Corporation; MGM/UA Home Video, Inc.; Warner Home Video, Inc.; Warner Bros. Inc., Defendants-counter-claimants-Appellants. SUBAFILMS, LTD.; The Hearst Corp., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. MGM-PATHE COMMUNICATIONS CO., fka MGM/UA Communications Co. and as United Artists Corporation; MGM/UA Home Video, Inc.; Warner Home Video, Inc.; Warner Bros. Inc.; United Artists Corporation, Defendants-Appellees. Nos. 91-56248, 91-56379 and 91-56289. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Feb. 24, 1994. Decided May 13, 1994. Louis P. Petrich, Leopold, Petrich & Smith, Los Angeles, CA, for defendants-counter-claimants-appellants United Artists Corp., MGM/UA Communications Co., MGM/UA Home Video, Inc., Warner Bros., Inc., and Warner Home Video, Inc. Bertram Fields, Greenberg, Glusker, Fields, Claman & Machtinger, Los Angeles, CA, for plaintiffs-counter-defendants-appellees Subafilms, Ltd. and The Hearst Corp. Appeal from the United…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.