This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org

Apfel v. Prudential-Bache Securities: Difference between revisions

From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 12: Line 12:
Moreover, Prudential agreed to remunerate Apfel even if the system later became public knowledge.
Moreover, Prudential agreed to remunerate Apfel even if the system later became public knowledge.


Following personnel changes in 1985, Prudential ceases remunerations to Apfel.
Following personnel changes in 1985, Prudential ceased royalties to Apfel.
|procedural_history=Apfel sued Prudential in the New York Supreme Court (trial court).
|issues=Does the disclosure of an idea constitute sufficient [[Contracts/Consideration|consideration]] to support a contract?
|issues=Does the disclosure of an idea constitute sufficient [[Contracts/Consideration|consideration]] to support a contract?
|arguments=Prudential argued in 1985 that Apfel's idea was in the public domain at the time of the agreement; thus, the bond system idea wasn't Apfel's to sell (collect royalties on).
To buttress its claim that the bond idea didn't belong to Apfel, Prudential stated that its attempts to patent or trademark Apfel's idea had failed.
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
|link=https://casetext.com/case/apfel-v-prudential-bache-sec
|link=https://casetext.com/case/apfel-v-prudential-bache-sec

Revision as of 22:00, July 27, 2023

Apfel v. Prudential-Bache Securities
Court New York Court of Appeals
Citation 616 N.E.2d 1095
Date decided July 8, 1993

Facts

Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc. ("Prudential") was an investment bank headquartered in New York City.

Mr. Apfel was a banker who created a new bond financing system that allowed bonds to be sold, traded, & held through computerized book entries. Later on, Apfel's system became the industry standard for the issuance of all government & corporate bonds.

In 1982, Apfel presented Prudential a proposal for issuing municipal securities (such as bonds) through the bond system. Following negotiations, Apfel agreed to convey his right to the system in exchange for payments from Prudential.

Moreover, Prudential agreed to remunerate Apfel even if the system later became public knowledge.

Following personnel changes in 1985, Prudential ceased royalties to Apfel.

Procedural History

Apfel sued Prudential in the New York Supreme Court (trial court).

Issues

Does the disclosure of an idea constitute sufficient consideration to support a contract?

Arguments

Prudential argued in 1985 that Apfel's idea was in the public domain at the time of the agreement; thus, the bond system idea wasn't Apfel's to sell (collect royalties on).

To buttress its claim that the bond idea didn't belong to Apfel, Prudential stated that its attempts to patent or trademark Apfel's idea had failed.

Case Text Links