|
|
Daily Case Update Archive
As a service to our members, we monitor opinions issued from the
Ohio Supreme Court, the
Ohio State First District
Court of Appeals, and the United
States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. You can read
the latest summaries or archived summaries from
2005 or
2006.
If you would like to receive a daily e-mail with same-day case updates,
please join our Members-Only
discussion list. Not a member?
Join today!
February 13th, 2007
Ohio Supreme Court
| Ohio First District |
U.S. 6th Circuit - Ohio | U.S. 6th Circuit - Other States
TOPICS:
- Copyright-infringement-and-ownership
- ERISA - short-term disability benefits
- Ohio Supreme Court
-
-
No Opinions.
- First District Court of Appeals
- [Search Other Ohio Districts]
-
No Opinions.
- U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals: Ohio Cases
-
-
No Opinions.
- U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals: Other States Cases
-
-
Roger Miller Music v. Sony/ATV Publishing (Feb. 13, 2007) (Appeal from
M.D. Tenn.)
-
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0060p-06.pdf
- Plaintiffs-Appellants Mary Arnold Miller and Roger Miller Music,
Inc. (the "Appellants") brought this copyright-infringement-and-ownership
action against Defendant-Appellee Sony/ATV Publishing, LLC ("Sony"). Mary
Miller is the wife of the late Roger Miller, a renowned country-music singer
and songwriter, and Roger Miller Music, Inc. ("RMMI") is an assignee. Sony
is the successor-in-interest to Tree Publishing Co., Inc. ("Tree"),the
publishing company Miller contracted with from 1958 until his death in 1992.
In their motion for summary judgment before the district court, Appellants
asserted numerous claims: (1) Appellants are the legal owners of the renewal
copyrights in Miller's 1958-1963 and 1964 songs; (2) Sony is not a
beneficial owner of the renewal copyrights in the 1964 songs; and (3) Sony
is liable for songs. Sony filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings
asserting that (1) Appellants' ownership and infringement claims were
untimely; (2) Sony owns the renewal copyrights in the 1958-1963 songs; (3)
Sony is a beneficial owner of the renewal copyrights in the 1964 songs; and
(4) Sony is not liable for copyright infringement because it has an implied,
non-exclusive license in Miller's songs. For the following reasons, we
AFFIRM the district court's ruling that (1) Sony is the owner of the renewal
copyrights in Miller's 1958-1963 songs; (2) Appellants' ownership claims are
timely; and (3) Appellants' infringement claims are timely for Sony's
conduct between December 21, 2001,and December 21, 2004. Further, we REVERSE
the district court's ruling that Sony's statements regarding Appellants'
ownership of the renewal copyrights in the 1964 songs were judicial
admissions and REMAND for a determination as to whether the district court
can hear Sony's argument that it owns the renewal copyrights in Miller's
1964 songs.
Pollett v. Rinker Materials (Feb. 13, 2007) (Appeal from W.D. Ky.)
-
http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0061p-06.pdf
- The issue in this appeal is whether an employee, while suspended
without pay, was "actively at work" and thus qualified to receive short-term
disability benefits under his employer's ERISA plan. The plan administrator
said no. The district court also said no and dismissed the action on
undisputed facts.1 We exercise jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Because
the ERISA plan does not provide the administrator discretionary authority to
construe its terms, we review the prior construction of the plan de novo.
See Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch, 489 U.S. 101, 115 (1989). Applying
this standard, we affirm.
|
Daily Case Updates
|