Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 6, 2023

DArezzo v. Appel

Judge
Stewart Aaron
Docket
1:22-cv-00177
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Motion to DismissCivil ProcedureIntellectual Property
In one sentence

In D’AREZZO v. APPEL, Judge Engelmayer partly granted and partly denied defendants’ dismissal motion, dismissing sole-authorship and copyright claims.

Who this affects

Angela D’Are​​zzo’s sole-authorship and copyright-infringement claims were dismissed through the granted portion of the motion; her co-authorship, breach-of-fiduciary-duty, accounting, and constructive-trust claims were not dismissed by this motion.

What happened

In D’AREZZO v. APPEL, Angela D’Are​​zzo claimed she—not Catherine Appel—was the author of The Salty Mountain, and brought copyright and related claims against Appel and Overtime Dance Foundation, Inc.

The court granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss. It granted the motion as to D’Are​​zzo’s sole-authorship and copyright-infringement claims, but denied it as to her co-authorship, breach-of-fiduciary-duty, accounting, and constructive-trust claims.

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer adopted Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron’s Report and Recommendation in full after finding no clear error; because no party objected, the opinion states that appellate review was waived.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
DArezzo v. Appel · No. 1:22-cv-00177
Judge
Stewart Aaron
Date
July 6, 2023

Background

Angela D’Are​​zzo brought a federal copyright action against Catherine Appel and Overtime Dance Foundation, Inc. D’Are​​zzo alleged that she was the true author of The Salty Mountain, a book about her extended family’s history in and immigration from Italy, and that Appel falsely registered the book as her own work. She sought a declaration that she was the sole author or, alternatively, that she and Appel were co-authors. She also asserted claims for copyright infringement, breach of fiduciary duty, an accounting, and a constructive trust.

The defendants moved to dismiss. The motion was referred to Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron for a Report and Recommendation. On May 31, 2023, Judge Aaron recommended granting the motion as to the sole-authorship and copyright-infringement claims and denying it as to the remaining claims. No party objected.

Court’s Analysis

Because there were no objections, Judge Engelmayer reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error—a review asking whether an obvious mistake appears on the record. He found no facial error in the Report’s conclusions and adopted it in its entirety. The opinion does not itself provide the Report’s full reasoning for each claim.

Disposition

The court granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The motion was granted as to D’Are​​zzo’s sole-authorship and copyright claims. It was denied as to her co-authorship, breach-of-fiduciary-duty, accounting, and constructive-trust claims. The case remained under Judge Aaron’s pretrial supervision. The court also stated that the parties’ failure to object waived appellate review, consistent with the warning in the Report.

Judge

The order was issued by Paul A. Engelmayer, United States District Judge. Stewart D. Aaron served as the magistrate judge who prepared the adopted Report and Recommendation and continued pretrial supervision.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.