James W. Cleary v. News Corporation and Harpercollins Publishers, Inc.

Bad Law
30 F.3d 1255·94 Daily Journal DAR 10743·1994 WL 393449·22 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2076·31 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1760
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 1, 199492-55697California5,488 words

Opinion

Opinion

Will, J.

Opinion by Senior District Judge WILL.

Dr. James W. Cleary sued News Corporation, the publishers of Robert’s Rules of Order, under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125 , for alleged misattribution of his work product. He also brought state law claims for unfair competition, breach of contract, and intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants on all counts. The district court had jurisdiction over Cleary’s Lanham Act claim under 15 U.S.C. § 1121 , and over the state law claims under the doctrine of supplemental jurisdiction, as well as diversity of citizenship. Cleary timely appealed the grant of summary judgment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . For the following reasons, we affirm.

I.

BACKGROUND

During the 1960s, James W. Cleary helped revise Robert’s Rules of Order for Scott, Foresman and Company. When the 1970 edition was published, Dr. Cleary was listed on the title page as having assisted the named author, Sarah Corbin Robert, along with Henry M. Robert III and William J. Evans. The work was republished in 1980 and once again title page credit was given to Cleary, Robert III, and…

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.