This is an action for plagiarism. The work alleged to have been plagiarized is a work entitled, "Employec Pay, Benefits and Taxes." The plaintiff alleges that in 1956 he delivered a manuscript copy of said work to defendant Casey for the purpose of procuring publication by the defendant Prentice-Hall, Inc. He alleges defendant Casey delivered the manuscript to defendants Prentice-Hall, Inc., and Institute for Business Planning, Inc. He alleges that the defendants thereafter printed, published and sold, and made public portions of said work for their own use and benefit. MICROFILM Defendants admit that the plaintiff did prepare a manuscript entitled "Employee Pay, Benefit and Taxes." Defendants concede that a copy of this manuscript was given to the defendant Casey. Defendants concede that Casey delivered a copy of the manuscript to Prentice-Hall, Inc. Defendants deny that the manuscript was original. Defendants contend that the manuscript was given to Prentice-Hall, Inc., by authorization of the plaintiff. Defendants deny that any publication they put out plagiarized the manuscript of the plaintiff. The issues to be tried are: (1) Was the delivery of the manuscript to Prentice J Hall, Inc., done with the authority of the plaintiff; and did he authorize the delivery for the purpose of having publication by Prentice-Hall, Inc., of the manuscript or part of it, and if so on what terms did he make such authorization? The plaintiff contends that portions of the manuscript were published both by Prentice-Hall, Inc., and by the Institute for Business Planning, Inc., which is a subsidiary of Prentice-Hall, Inc., even though not a wholly-owned subsidiary. (2) was any publication put out by the defendants a plagiary of the manuscript of the plaintiff? i.. (3) If the publication put out by the defendants was a plagiary of the manuscript of the plaintiff, what are the damages of the plaintiff? A copy of the manuscript is on file in this court attached to the answers of interrogatories made by plaintiff to defendants. Such portions as the plaintiff contends were plagiarized from the manuscript are attached to the answers of the plaintiff to interrogatories on file in this court. If either side intends to call expert witnesses, they will notify their opponents in writing ten days before the case actually starts on trial of the names and addresses of the experts and specialists they require. All pre-trial preparations have been concluded by the parties and the case seems in all respects ready for trial. The case will proceed on the Trial Calendar. This is a Pre-Trial Order which will cover the future progress of this case and will be binding upon the parties, unless amended in the interest of justice. Dated: New York, New York, May 15, 1961. ARCHIE O. DAWSON U. S. D. J. Excerpts From the Transcript of the Fields Case UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, SOUTHERN DISTRICT Civil Jury, Cal. No. 151-180 HARRY R. FIELDS, PLAINTIFF V. WILLIAM J. CASEY, PRENTICE-HALL, INC., AND INSTITUTE FOR New York, February 28, 1962, 12:35 p.m. Before Hon. J. B. CRAVENS, Jr., District Judge, and a Jury APPEARANCES Gustave B. Garfield, Esq., Attorney for Plaintiff. De Witt, Nast & Diskin, Esqs., Attorneys for Defendants William J. Casey and Institute for Business Planning, Inc., Thomas A. Diskin, Esq., Walter A. Donnelly, Esq., and Leo A. Egan, Esq., of Counsel. Alfred G. Mueller, Esq., Attorney for Defendant Prentice-Hall, Inc., William J., Daly, Esq., of Counsel. The CLERK. Fields versus Casey. Both sides ready? Mr. GARFIELD. Ready. Mr. DISKIN. Ready. (A jury was duly impaneled and sworn.) The COURT. Let me say this to those who have been sworn and impaneled. During this trial, which is expected to last several days, do not talk about the case even among yourselves until the proper time comes. Be careful, please, to not put yourself in a position of overhearing others talk about it, if you can avoid that. In coming and going to the courtroom if you hear somebody talking about the case and they persist in it, why, speak up and tell them you are on the jury, if you are in the elevator with them, and can't get away from them. Make every effort, in other words, to not only be fairI know you will do that-but in addition to that to have the appearance of being fair so that everyone can have confidence in your verdict. Now we will adjourn court until 2:30 p.m. (Adjourned to 2:30 p.m.) AFTERNOON SESSION (In open court, jury present.) The COURT. Gentlemen, I take it you wish to make opening statements to the jury. Mr. GARFIELD. Thank you, your Honor. May it please the Court, ladies and gentlemen of the jury: This is an action known as a suit in plagiarism. The COURT. Mr. Garfield, let me interrupt you for a moment. Members of the jury, what you are now about to hear from Mr. Garfield, attorney for the plaintiff, and other counsel for the defendants, is not of course, evidence. It is not supposed to be that. They simply state to you, each side, what the contentions of the various parties are. You don't decide the lawsuit on the basis of statements by counsel. I instruct you that you will not consider any statements by any counsel, not only Mr. Garfield, of course, but other counsel, as being evidence. You may proceed, sir. Mr. GARFIELD. Thank you, your Honor. The purpose of this opening, as his Honor has told you, is to sketchily and in outline acquaint you with the facts that I hope to prove, the facts and the contentions that we make in this case, and the purpose of my outline is simply to present those facts to you in comprehensive fashion so that when the evidence |