Gostin v. Gostin, 352 N.E.2d 584 (N.Y. 1976). · Go Syfert
Search
Gostin v. Gostin, 352 N.E.2d 584 (N.Y. 1976). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“the use of plaintiffs photograph was merely incidental advertising of defendants' magazine in which plaintiff had earlier been properly and fairly depicted.”
20 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Parks v. LaFace Records (mied, 1999-11-18)
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1980 2003 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Parks v. LaFace Records
E.D. Mich. · 1999 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
the use of plaintiffs photograph was merely incidental advertising of defendants' magazine in which plaintiff had earlier been properly and fairly depicted.
discussed Cited "see" Lohan v. Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.
nycterr · 2018 · signal: see · confidence high
N.Y.1980], quoting **785 *394 Time, Inc. v. Hill, 385 U.S. 374 , 382, 87 S.Ct. 534 , 17 L.Ed.2d 456 [1967] ; see Howell, 81 N.Y.2d at 123 , 596 N.Y.S.2d 350 , 612 N.E.2d 699 ) because "freedom of speech and the press ... transcends the right to privacy" ( Namath v. Sports Illustrated, 80 Misc.2d 531 , 535, 363 N.Y.S.2d 276 [Sup. Ct., New York County 1975], affd 48 A.D.2d 487 , 371 N.Y.S.2d 10 [1st Dept. 1975], affd 39 N.Y.2d 897 , 386 N.Y.S.2d 397 , 352 N.E.2d 584 [1976] ).
discussed Cited "see" Lane v. Random House, Inc.
D.D.C. · 1995 · signal: see · confidence high
See Namath v. Sports Illustrated, 48 A.D.2d 487 , 371 N.Y.S.2d 10, 11-12 (1st Dept.1975) (use of plaintiffs photograph for purposes of soliciting subscriptions is an incidental use where photograph gave reader indication of contents of magazine), aff'd, 39 N.Y.2d 897 , 386 N.Y.S.2d 397 , 352 N.E.2d 584 (1976); Rand, 298 N.Y.S.2d at 410-12 (use of quotation from book review comparing book to work of renowned author on book jacket was incidental use because purpose of use was to inform public of nature of book being sold).” Groden, at 6-7.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." D'ANDREA v. Rafla-Demetrious
E.D.N.Y · 1997 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Namath v. Sports Illustrated, 48 A.D.2d 487 , 371 N.Y.S.2d 10, 11 (1st Dep’t 1975), aff'd, 39 N.Y.2d 897 , 386 N.Y.S.2d 397 , 352 N.E.2d 584 (1976) (republication, for “sheer advertising and solicitation” purposes, of newsworthy photograph of Joe Namath is “incidental advertising” not prohibited by the statute).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Irving Gostin
v.
Ruth Gostin
New York Court of Appeals.
Jun 8, 1976.
352 N.E.2d 584
1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2841
Bernard R. Selkowe for motion., Melvyn Altman opposed.
Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 65%
Citer courts: E.D. Michigan (1)

Motion dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from involves questions of discretion of the type not reviewable by the Court of Appeals.