Gmurzynska v. Hutton
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
355 F.3d 206 (2004)
- Written by Heather Whittemore, JD
Facts
Galerie Gmurzynska (Galerie) (plaintiff), an art gallery in Germany, had a longstanding rivalry with Hutton Galleries (Hutton) (defendant), an art gallery in New York. Art experts associated with Hutton (defendants) allegedly disparaged Galerie to art collectors, suggesting that Galerie had no knowledge of Russian art and was selling fake works of art, and attempting to convince the art collectors to purchase art from Hutton instead. The Hutton-aligned art experts also allegedly convinced a journalist to write a negative article about Galerie for an art journal. Though the article was never published, the journal did advertise that it was planning on publishing an article about Galerie. Galerie filed a lawsuit in federal district court against Hutton and the art experts, arguing that they had violated the Lanham Act by disparaging Galerie and promoting Hutton through false or misleading statements. The district court dismissed Galerie’s complaint, holding that the Lanham Act did not apply to the facts alleged by Galerie, because Hutton itself was not alleged to have made false or misleading statements, and because the art experts were not in competition with Galerie. Galerie appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.