SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(US)(ca2) 84

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
Michael Grecco Prods. Inc. – Appellant
Versus
RADesign Inc. – Respondent



In the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit _________________

August Term 2023 Argued: February 22, 2024 Decided: August 16, 2024

Docket No. 23-1078

MICHAEL GRECCO PRODUCTIONS, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

RADESIGN, INC., DAVIS BY RUTHIE DAVIS, INC., RUTHIE ALLYN DAVIS, RUTHIE DAVIS, INC., DOES 1–5,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________ Before: WESLEY, CHIN, and LEE, Circuit Judges. _________________

Michael Grecco Productions, Inc. (“MGP”) sued Ruthie Allyn Davis and associated entities (collectively “Ruthie Davis”) for copyright infringement. The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Abrams, J.) granted Davis’s motion to dismiss MGP’s complaint as barred by the Copyright Act’s three-year limitations provision. The district court reasoned that copyright holders “sophisticated” in detecting and litigating infringements cannot benefit from the discovery rule. The district court identified MGP as one of these so-called “sophisticated” plaintiffs, concluded that MGP should have therefore discovered Davis’s alleged infringement within three years of when it began, and determined that, because MGP’s complaint touted its “sophistication,” it was clear from the face of the complaint that the claims were time-barred.

On appeal, MGP argues that the discovery rule determines when its claims accrued, regardless of its general sophistication in detecting and litigating infringements, and that it was not clear from the face of its complaint or matters of judicial notice that its claims were time-barred. We agree. There is no “sophisticated plaintiff” exception to the discovery rule or to a defendant’s burden to plead and prove a statute-of-limitations defense.

Accordingly, we VACATE and REMAND for further proceedings.

_________________ FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT: BRUCE W. BELLINGHAM, Spector Gadon Rosen Vinci, PC, Philadelphia, PA.

(Peter E. Perkowski, Perkowski Legal, PC, Los Angeles, CA, for American Society of Media Photographers, Inc., North American Nature Photography Association, American Photographic Artists, The National Press Photographers Association, Xposure Photo Agency Inc., Okularity, Inc., as amici curiae) FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES: EMILY B. KIRSCH (Paul Niehaus, Craig Tarasoff, on the brief), Kirsch & Niehaus PLLC, New York, NY. _________________ WESLEY, Circuit Judge:

This appeal concerns the discovery rule and a statute-of-limitations defense in a copyright case where the plaintiff copyright holder is allegedly

2 “sophisticated” in detecting and litigating infringements. Plaintiff-Appellant Michael Grecco Productions, Inc. (“MGP”) alleged that Defendants-Appellees Ruthie Allyn Davis and associated entities and persons (collectively, “Ruthie Davis”) used, without license, Michael Grecco’s copyrighted photos i

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top