Di Fabrizzio v. Clarity
Luis Di Fabrizzio v. Edward D. Clarity
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
On the court’s own motion, the decision of this court handed down December 1, 1947 (ante, p. 769), is amended to read as follows: Action to recover damages for the unauthorized use by defendant, a photographer, of pictures of plaintiffs for trade purposes. Order denying defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, *776 affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements, with leave to defendant to answer within ten days from the entry of the order hereon. (Holmes v. TJnderwood é Underwood, Inc., 225 App. Div. 360 .) Hagarty, Acting P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ., concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 0 cases
No case in this database cites this case.