History
  • No items yet
midpage
Hubges v. Belasco
130 F. 388
U.S. Circuit Court for the Dis...
1904
Check Treatment
LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.

There is no direct evidence of copying either language or dramatic situations. As to such indirect evidence as a comparison of the two plays affords, it is sufficient to say that they are wholly dissimilar in plot, in characters, in text, and in dramatic situations. The climax of one act in each piece was principally relied upon in argument, where the unexpected discovery of the title character in a place where she should not be makes a dramatic situation which is presumably helpful to the success of both plays. That is an old device. It was common property of all playwrights when Sheridan employed it in the “School for Scandal.” Analyzing the details of that situation as presented in these two plays, the points of essential difference so far outnumber the points of similarity that it is difficult to understand how any one could persuade himself that the one was borrowed from the other.

The motion is denied.

Case Details

Case Name: Hubges v. Belasco
Court Name: U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
Date Published: Mar 26, 1904
Citation: 130 F. 388
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.