Fort Knox Music v. Baptiste
| Decision Date | 01 August 1999 |
| Docket Number | Docket Nos. 99-7590 |
| Citation | 203 F.3d 193 |
| Parties | (2nd Cir. 2000) FORT KNOX MUSIC INC. and TRIO MUSIC COMPANY INC., Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross- Appellants, v. PHILIP BAPTISTE, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee. (L), -7679(XAP) |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, John E. Sprizzo, Judge, declaring defendant's claim of rights to a certain musical composition time-barred and enjoining him from challenging plaintiffs' rights to the composition; cross-appeal by plaintiffs from denial of attorney's fees.
Remanded for supplementation of the record.
ABELMAN, FRAYNE & SCHWAB, New York, New York (Robert C. Osterberg, New York, New York, of counsel), for Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant Fort Knox Music Inc.
SILVERMAN SHULMAN & BAKER, New York, New York (Alan L. Shulman, Jonathan J. Ross, New York, New York, of counsel), for Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant Trio Music Co.
PHILIP BAPTISTE, Jennings, Louisiana, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee pro se.
Before: KEARSE, PARKER, and POOLER, Circuit Judges.
Defendant pro se Philip Baptiste appeals from so much of a final judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, John E. Sprizzo, Judge, as (a) declared that his right to claim sole authorship of the song "Sea of Love," written in 1957, is time-barred, and (b) enjoined him from challenging the rights of plaintiff music publishers Fort Knox Music Inc. ("Fort Knox") and Trio Music Company Inc. ("Trio Music") to the song. Plaintiffs cross-appeal from so much of the judgment as denied them attorney's fees under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 505, in connection with the present action. On appeal, Baptiste, in addition to challenging the judgment against him on its merits, contends that the district court lacked personal jurisdiction over him. For the reasons that follow, we remand to the district court for supplementation of the record with respect to the basis for its ruling on the jurisdiction issue; we address no other issues at this time.
The present action was commenced by plaintiffs in 1997, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against any challenge by Baptiste to plaintiffs' rights and copyrights in "Sea of Love." To the extent pertinent to this opinion, the complaint alleged that Baptiste, "a resident of the State of Louisiana," had "individually and under the trade name of Abtone Publishing Company, ... licensed in the city, county and state of New York the use of his interests in musical compositions through agreements with Broadcast Music, Inc." (Complaint 4, 5.) Plaintiffs alleged that in April 1997, Baptiste had begun "a concerted letter-writing campaign directed to Fort Knox at its offices within this jurisdiction and to Trio Music challenging plaintiffs' rights in and to the Composition." (Id. 16.) Some 10 such letters were annexed to the complaint as exhibits.
Baptiste moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground, inter alia, of lack of personal jurisdiction. In sworn written submissions, Baptiste stated that he was a lifelong resident of Louisiana (Baptiste Affidavit dated September 22, 1997); that in 1959, he had signed a music publishing contract with plaintiffs' predecessor, Kamar Publishing Company ("Kamar"), which was "also located in Louisiana" (Baptiste Memorandum in Support of Motion To Quash Service of Summons, at 2); that thereafter Kamar wrongly credited George Khoury, also a Louisiana resident, with being a coauthor of the Song; and that Baptiste had written numerous letters requesting that Khoury not be listed as a coauthor and had sued Kamar in Louisiana in 1961 to regain the copyright rights he had assigned (a suit that Baptiste said was still pending). Arguing that all of the relevant events had occurred in Louisiana and that all of the persons involved in the controversy, "except the plaintiffs, are located in Louisiana" (id. at 4), Baptiste contended that the court lacked personal jurisdiction over him.
In opposition to the motion to quash, plaintiffs noted that both they and Baptiste were affiliated with the same performing rights licensing organization. They argued that the court had jurisdiction over Baptiste "by reason of (1) his transaction of business through correspondence directed at plaintiffs and their performing rights licensing organization in New York purporting to recapture the copyright to the Song, and (2) by defendant's licensing of his interests in the Song for public performance in this district." (Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendant's Motion To Quash Service of Summons, at 13.)
On January 16, 1998, the district court held a hearing on Baptiste's motion to dismiss, allowing Baptiste to argue by telephone from Louisiana. By order dated January 21, 1998, the court denied the motion, stating "that for the reasons set forth on the Record at Oral Argument defendant pro se's motion to quash service of the summons and to dismiss the complaint is denied." According to the transcript of the January 16 hearing, however, the court at that time reserved decision on Baptiste's motion and neither stated that it had personal jurisdiction over Baptiste nor stated on what basis it might find that such jurisdiction existed.
Following entry of the order denying his motion to dismiss, Baptiste answered the complaint. The district court subsequently granted a motion by plaintiffs for judgment on the pleadings, entering a judgment stating, in pertinent part, that
defendant is time barred from asserting any right arising out of his claim of sole authorship of the song "Sea of Love", defendant is enjoined from commencing any action challenging the right of the plaintiffs to the song[;] ... plaintiffs' application for attorneys fees is denied ....
Baptiste's appeal raises issues as to personal jurisdiction that must be resolved before we reach either the merits of the case or plaintiffs' cross-appeal from the denial of attorney's fees. The Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 101 et seq., does not provide for nationwide service of process. See, e.g., Janmark, Inc. v. Reidy, 132 F.3d 1200, 1201 (7th Cir. 1997). In such a circumstance, "a federal court applies the forum state's personal jurisdiction rules ...." PDK Labs, Inc. v. Friedlander, 103 F.3d 1105, 1108 (2d Cir. 1997); see also Omni Capital International, Ltd. v. Rudolf Wolff & Co., 484 U.S. 97, 10305 (1...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Lipitor Antitrust Litig., s. 14-4202
...Sch. Dist. , 448 F.3d 1146, 1150 (9th Cir. 2006) (limited remand for Article III standing determination); Fort Knox Music Inc. v. Baptiste , 203 F.3d 193, 197 (2d Cir. 2000) (limited remand for personal jurisdiction determination); Jason's Foods, Inc. v. Peter Eckrich & Sons, Inc. , 768 F.2......
-
Cromer Finance Ltd. v. Berger, 00 CIV. 2284(DLC).
...of conducting activities within New York and thereby invok[ed] the benefits and protections of its laws.'" Fort Knox Music Inc. v. Baptiste, 203 F.3d 193, 196 (2d Cir.2000) (citation K & W argues that this Court lacks jurisdiction because its contacts with New York were infrequent. Even if ......
-
Mobil Cerro Negro Ltd. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
...the Second Circuit has held, “ ‘a federal court [is to] appl[y] the forum state's personal jurisdiction rules.” Fort Knox Music Inc. v. Baptiste, 203 F.3d 193, 196 (2d Cir.2000) (quoting PDK Labs, Inc. v. Friedlander, 103 F.3d 1105, 1108 (2d Cir.1997) ). The Circuit therefore held that New ......
-
Citadel Management, Inc. v. Telesis Trust, Inc., 00 Civ. 2342(RWS).
...to CPLR § 302, "the court then must decide whether such exercise comports with the requisites of due process." Fort Knox Music Inc. v. Baptiste, 203 F.3d 193, 196 (2d Cir.2000) (quoting Bensusan Restaurant Corp. v. King, 126 F.3d 25, 27 (2d Cir. 1997)). Due process requires that the defenda......