In Ziegfeld v. Norworth (134 App. Div. 951) it appeared that the defendant was the real star around whom the whole production of the plaintiff's play centered and that she had been heavily featured in announcements and advertisements so as to give her chief prominence.
Summary of this case from Hammerstein v. MannOctober, 1909.
Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. (Ingraham and Scott, JJ., dissenting.)
In Ziegfeld v. Norworth (134 App. Div. 951) it appeared that the defendant was the real star around whom the whole production of the plaintiff's play centered and that she had been heavily featured in announcements and advertisements so as to give her chief prominence.
Summary of this case from Hammerstein v. MannFull title:Florenz Ziegfeld, Jr., Respondent, v. Nora Bayes Norworth and Jack…
Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Date published: Oct 1, 1909
In Shubert v. Angeles ( 80 App. Div. 625) the court said: "She was employed because of her special talent as…