Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Macy's, Inc. v. J.C. Penney Corp.

45 Misc. 3d 274 (2014)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 28,700+ case briefs...

Macy’s, Inc. v. J.C. Penney Corp.

New York Supreme Court

45 Misc. 3d 274 (2014)

Facts

Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Inc. (MSLO) (former defendant), a media and merchandising company founded by Martha Stewart, collaborated with Macy’s, Inc. (Macy) (plaintiff), a national chain of upscale department stores, by entering into a valid license and promotion agreement with Macy (the Macy/MSLO agreement). The Macy/MSLO agreement provided that Macy would be the exclusive manufacturer, distributor, and seller of certain MSLO home products using the Martha Stewart trademark. Macy launched the Martha Stewart Collection at its stores and on its website. MSLO products became the leading brand at Macy’s stores. MSLO began to explore strategic partnerships to offset heavy losses in its media business. J.C. Penney Corporation (JCP) (defendant), the operator of department stores that competed with Macy, met with MSLO to discuss a strategic partnership. The Macy/MSLO agreement covered the same types of products that JCP wanted to develop with MSLO. JCP encouraged MSLO to breach the terms of the Macy/MSLO agreement by flattering Martha Stewart and offering her financial inducements. MSLO counsel believed that MSLO’s participation in JCP’s shops-within-a-store plan would not breach the Macy/MSLO agreement. JCP and MSLO entered into a licensing agreement (the JCP/MSLO agreement) to sell home products branded with a Martha Stewart trademark. Macy brought an action against JCP for tortious interference with the Macy/MSLO agreement by inducing MSLO to breach certain terms of the exclusivity agreement. The court heard all of the evidence. Prior to the court’s decision, JCP’s deal with MSLO ended and Macy settled its dispute with MSLO. Macy continued to maintain its claim that JCP was liable for tortious interference with the Macy/MSLO agreement.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Oing, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 546,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 546,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 28,700 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 546,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 28,700 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership