Case ID: f2d_500/html/1221-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

MEREDITH CORPORATION, an Iowa corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HARPER & ROW, PUBLISHERS, INC., et al., Defendants-Appellees, Brian Sutton-Smith, an Individual, and Prentice-Hall, Inc., a Delaware corporation, Additional Defendants on Counterclaim-Appellants.
    No. 1228, Docket 74-1726.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    Argued June 26, 1974.
    Decided July 8, 1974.
    Marshall C. Berger, New York City (Hahn, Hessen, Margolis & Ryan, New York City, Molinare, Allegretti, Newitt & Witcoff, Chicago, 111., William J. Daly, Jr., New York City, George B. Newitt, George P. McAndrews, Chicago, 111., Wayne Carson, New York City, on the brief), for plaintiff-appellant and additional defendants-appellants.
    John C. Lankenau, New York City (Lankenau, Kovner, Bickford & Beer, Victor A. Kovner, Edward A. Miller, Nathaniel J. Bickford, New York City, on the brief), for defendants-appellees.
    Before MOORE and FEINBERG, Circuit Judges, and PALMIERI, District Judge.
    
      
       Of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.
    
   PER CURIAM:

The appellants assert error in the grant of a preliminary injunction.

This is essentially a dispute between the publishers of competing textbooks in the child development field. The defendants-appellees, seeking redress as copyright holders, convinced Judge Owen upon a persuasive factual record that they would probably succeed on the merits, that the appellants had plagiarized their textbook, and that there was need for immediate relief. There was a sufficient basis for the findings and conclusions of the District Court and since they are not clearly erroneous, Fed.R. Civ.P. 52(a), we affirm.