Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword or section
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Psenicksa Appellate Brief

Psenicksa Appellate Brief

Ratings:

4.0

(1)
|Views: 612 |Likes:
Published by Panda Kroll
As seen in www.humorinthecourt.com (blog of Panda Kroll):
Appeal filed 2/9/09 in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals by Diane Krausz and Peter Levine on behalf of appellant Michael Psenicska.
As seen in www.humorinthecourt.com (blog of Panda Kroll):
Appeal filed 2/9/09 in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals by Diane Krausz and Peter Levine on behalf of appellant Michael Psenicska.

More info:

Published by: Panda Kroll on Apr 03, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

01/31/2013

pdf

text

original

 
08-4604-cv
IN
THE
Untteb states Court of
FOR THE
SECOND CIRCUIT**-«<
MICHAEL
PSENICSKA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
TWENTIETH
CENTURY FOX FILM CORPORATION, ONE AMERICA PRODUCTIONS, INC.,
TODD
LEWIS, SACHA BARON COHEN,
Defendants-Appellees.
On
Appeal from the
United States
District Courtfor the Southern District of New York
BRIEF FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANTMICHAEL PSENICSKA
PETER
MICHAEL LEVINE, ESQ.
Attorney for Plaintiff-AppellantMichael Psenicska
420 Lexington Avenue, Suite 2620New York, New York 10170212-599-0009
 
TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF AUTHORITIES i-vSTATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 1ISSUES PRESENTED 2STATEMENT OF THE CASE 3STATEMENT OF FACTS 5
THE BORAT MOTION PICTURE
5
PSENICSKA 'S ROLE IN THE BORAT MOTION PICTURE
10
THE CONSENT AGREEMENT
14SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT 16STANDARD OF REVIEW 18ARGUMENT 19I. THE DISTRICT COURT IMPROPERLYMADE FINDINGS OF FACT ABOUT THEBORAT MOTION PICTURE 19
II.
THE DISTRICT COURT IMPROPERLYCONCLUDED THAT THE CONSENT AGREEMENTCOVERS A WORK OF FICTION SUCH ASTHE BORAT MOTION PICTURE 21
 
III. THE DISTRICT COURT IMPROPERLY CONCLUDEDTHAT THE PHRASE "DOCUMENTARY-STYLE FILM"WAS UNAMBIGUOUS 27IV. PSENICSKA MAY MAINTAIN A CLAIM FORFRAUDULENT INDUCEMENT 30V. PSENICSKA DID NOT DISCLAIM RELIANCE ON THEORAL MISREPRESENTATION 34CONCLUSION 36CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

Activity (4)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
esteeu2 liked this
ianbez liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->