Gail Knight Steinbeck v. Waverly Kaffaga
702 F. App'x 618
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- John Steinbeck’s sons (the “Sons”) sued to terminate and exploit copyrights in Steinbeck’s works.
- Earlier litigation in the Second Circuit and a 2009 stipulated judgment in S.D.N.Y. addressed these same termination notices and the parties’ rights under a 1983 Settlement Agreement.
- The Second Circuit held the 1983 Settlement Agreement unambiguous and that the Sons were not intended to retain control over exploitation or termination of Steinbeck’s works.
- The S.D.N.Y. stipulation expressly invalidated two termination notices (The Red Pony and The Long Valley) and confirmed the binding effect of the 1983 Settlement Agreement.
- The district court dismissed the Sons’ suit as barred by collateral estoppel (and claim preclusion as to the actually litigated notices); the Ninth Circuit panel affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Sons may issue and exploit termination notices for Steinbeck works | Sons contend they retain termination and exploitation rights | Appellees argue prior settlement and judgments bar those rights | Dismissal affirmed: prior litigation and the 1983 Agreement preclude Sons’ claims |
| Validity of specific termination notices (e.g., The Red Pony, The Long Valley) | Sons assert notices valid | Appellees contend notices invalid per prior adjudication | Notices invalid; claim preclusion applies to those actually litigated notices |
| Whether district court’s dismissal of infringement and other claims was erroneous | Sons raised these claims below and on appeal | Appellees say these claims are barred by collateral estoppel and waived on appeal | Held barred by collateral estoppel; many issues waived for failure to timely raise them |
| Contractual duty to pay fair market value for a documentary license under covenant of good faith | Sons for first time on appeal: entitlement to fair market value | Appellees: issue not raised below, waived | Issue waived on appeal; not considered |
Key Cases Cited
- Steinbeck v. Steinbeck Heritage Found., [citation="400 F. App'x 572"] (2d Cir. 2010) (Second Circuit found 1983 Settlement Agreement unambiguous and preclusive)
- Penguin Grp. (USA) Inc. v. Steinbeck, 537 F.3d 193 (2d Cir. 2008) (earlier Second Circuit proceedings addressing parties’ rights)
- Oyeniran v. Holder, 672 F.3d 800 (9th Cir. 2012) (discussing collateral estoppel and preclusion principles)
- Tahoe-Sierra Pres. Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Reg'l Planning Agency, 322 F.3d 1064 (9th Cir. 2003) (claim preclusion principles)
- Miller v. Fairchild Indus., Inc., 797 F.2d 727 (9th Cir. 1986) (issues not distinctly raised on appeal are waived)
- Whittaker Corp. v. Execuair Corp., 953 F.2d 510 (9th Cir. 1992) (failure to raise issue below results in waiver)