Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status
From our private database of 16,500+ case briefs...

Patsy’s Brand, Inc. v. I.O.B. Realty, Inc.

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
2002 WL 59434 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 16, 2002)


Patsy’s Brand, Inc. (Patsy’s) (plaintiff) sued Patsy’s Pizzeria, I.O.B. Realty, Inc. (I.O.B.), and its principals, Frank Brija and John Brecevich (defendants) for trademark infringement. Patsy’s alleged that after it began selling sauce under the name Patsy’s in 1994, the defendants also began selling sauce under the same name. Patsy’s sought a preliminary injunction to stop the defendants from selling sauce under the same name. Brija submitted an affidavit in opposition, claiming that the defendants had sold the sauce with the same label since 1993. Patsy’s reply papers pointed out that the label the defendants claimed to have used since 1993 contained information that was unavailable until 1998. I.O.B.’s counsel disavowed the affidavit and withdrew from representation. The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granted the preliminary injunction. I.O.B. then hired Pennie & Edmonds LLP (P&E) as its attorneys. The attorneys at P&E were aware of the false statements in Brija’s earlier affidavit and questioned Brija and Brecevich about it. Brija insisted that the sauce label had been created in 1993 but that a later version of the label had been submitted to the court by mistake. Brecevich corroborated Brija’s account. Patsy’s later filed a motion for summary judgment. In opposing the motion, P&E submitted a second affidavit from Brija, in which he again attested that the label had been created in 1993. The district court found Brija’s second affidavit to be undeniably false. The district court granted summary judgment for Patsy’s and sua sponte issued an order to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed on P&E pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP).

Rule of Law


Holding and Reasoning (Martin, 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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read 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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 409,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 16,500 briefs, keyed to 223 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.

Questions & Answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Sign up for a FREE 7-day trial