Pettibone v. WB Music Corp et al, No. 1:2017cv02569 - Document 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2018)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER re: 24 MOTION to Dismiss the Complaint, filed by Warner/Chappell Music, Inc., WB Music Corp, 27 MOTION for Summary Judgment and Response to Motion to Dismiss, filed by Robert E. Pettibone. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Warner's motion to dismiss the Complaint is GRANTED. Pettibone's cross-motion for summary judgment is therefore DENIED as moot. See New York City Dep't of Educ. v. S.S., No. 09-cv-810 (CM), 2010 WL 983719, at *17 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 17, 2010). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motions pending at docket numbers 24 and 27 and to close this case, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Richard J. Sullivan on 3/31/2018) (ras)

Download PDF

Pettibone v. WB Music Corp et al Doc. 34 Dockets.Justia.com since - as Pettibone conceded - it is entirely duplicative of his contract claim. (Doc. No. 22 at 28-29.) In any event, since the Court has rejected Pettibone's interpretation of the Agreement, this claim must also be rejected on the merits. Accordingly, the declaratory judgment claim is dismissed. IV. CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Warner's motion to dismiss the Complaint is GRANTED. Pettibone's cross-motion or summary judgment is therefore DENIED as moot. See New York City Dep't of Educ. v. .S., No. 09-cv-810 (CM), 2010 WL 983719, at *17 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 17, 2010). The Clerk of Court is respectully directed to terminate the motions pending at docket numbers 24 and 27 and to close this case. SO ORDERED. Dated: March 21, 2018 New York, New York United States District Judge 10

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.