• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Joe Simon Court Evidence
1 1

8 posts in this topic

Around 2001 and during that time, Joe Simon was broiled in a civil court case with marvel, the case is well documented. most of the debate is centered on ownership of the character Captain America. Simon was more than that he also gets credit for creating Blue Bolt. We have a sheet of paper reportedly drawn by Joe Simon and the character is Blue Bolt. 

The evidence stickers affixed to the folded sheet of paper indicate this drawing appeared in court. the two distinguished stickers indicated it was tagged in court as the defendants property, or evidence utilized by the defendant.  

This page has probably been making its way through collectors hands for decades. Now it is in my hands. Does anyone have information on the significance of this drawing? I find the page a little odd. Not because of what it seems to be, but because the tags are for the submission of evidence by the defense, which should be Marvel in this instance. Any thoughts?

pic1.jpg

pic2.jpg

pic3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, SoCalComics said:

Around 2001 and during that time, Joe Simon was broiled in a civil court case with marvel, the case is well documented. most of the debate is centered on ownership of the character Captain America. Simon was more than that he also gets credit for creating Blue Bolt. We have a sheet of paper reportedly drawn by Joe Simon and the character is Blue Bolt. 

The evidence stickers affixed to the folded sheet of paper indicate this drawing appeared in court. the two distinguished stickers indicated it was tagged in court as the defendants property, or evidence utilized by the defendant.  

This page has probably been making its way through collectors hands for decades. Now it is in my hands. Does anyone have information on the significance of this drawing? I find the page a little odd. Not because of what it seems to be, but because the tags are for the submission of evidence by the defense, which should be Marvel in this instance. Any thoughts?

pic1.jpg

pic2.jpg

pic3.jpg

I have no idea, but just wanted to say that's super cool!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The opinion itself is as unreadable as Sanskrit to me, but I took a quick look at and found nothing helpful to your question.  But if you want to read it yourself, here’s the link:

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1113903.html

here are a couple excerpts 

 

174489CF-EDCB-45BF-B71A-2838187F094B.png

71E12B0E-C1D4-4FE5-8EB1-F028E3748022.png
 

btw: your evidence stickers actually belong to the trial held at the state level, which preceded the federal action. They are easily distinguishable from the evidence stamps on the court copies of, say, Action 10. The Action 10 is from a federal trial


I researched Westlaw for the state case, in which your piece was used as an exhibit, but couldn’t find it. The caption for your state case is at the very bottom

 

 

B8053BBB-1E09-4DB2-8A0A-77B3A8C90CAE.jpeg

568F0D22-099B-47DD-A47B-5121A20688D8.jpeg

Edited by GreatCaesarsGhost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

The opinion itself is as unreadable as Sanskrit to me, but I took a quick look at and found nothing helpful to your question.  But if you want to read it yourself, here’s the link:

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1113903.html

here are a couple excerpts 

 

174489CF-EDCB-45BF-B71A-2838187F094B.png

71E12B0E-C1D4-4FE5-8EB1-F028E3748022.png
 

btw: your evidence stickers actually belong to the trial held at the state level, which preceded the federal action. They are easily distinguishable from the evidence stamps on the court copies of, say, Action 10. The Action 10 is from a federal trial


I researched Westlaw for the state case, in which your piece was used as an exhibit, but couldn’t find it. The caption for your state case is at the very bottom

 

 

B8053BBB-1E09-4DB2-8A0A-77B3A8C90CAE.jpeg

568F0D22-099B-47DD-A47B-5121A20688D8.jpeg

I've read the minutes and the testimony from several points of reference. Nowhere has the evidence been broken down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, SoCalComics said:

I've read the minutes and the testimony from several points of reference. Nowhere has the evidence been broken down. 

The state court trial must have been transcribed before Marvel removed the fight to federal court.  Just where those transcripts are now, 60 years later, is hard to fathom.  And of course, if you had the transcripts, you'd know who offered your piece into evidence, and for what reason.  It's hard to believe, but some things are simply lost in the mists of time.

I do know, as I'm sure you do too, that Simon and Kirby worked together on  Blue Bolt before Simon came up with the idea for Captain America.  Your piece is somehow referencing that.  But that's likely as close to the truth as we can now come.

Edited by GreatCaesarsGhost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, SoCalComics said:

Around 2001 and during that time, Joe Simon was broiled in a civil court case with marvel, the case is well documented. most of the debate is centered on ownership of the character Captain America. Simon was more than that he also gets credit for creating Blue Bolt. We have a sheet of paper reportedly drawn by Joe Simon and the character is Blue Bolt. 

The evidence stickers affixed to the folded sheet of paper indicate this drawing appeared in court. the two distinguished stickers indicated it was tagged in court as the defendants property, or evidence utilized by the defendant.  

This page has probably been making its way through collectors hands for decades. Now it is in my hands. Does anyone have information on the significance of this drawing? I find the page a little odd. Not because of what it seems to be, but because the tags are for the submission of evidence by the defense, which should be Marvel in this instance. Any thoughts?

 

 

 

If not for the date on the sticker, my first thought was that DC sued Novelty Press back in the 40s like they did Fox and Fawcett for some dumb reason like Blue Bolt's blue costume was copied from Supes. :D

Edited by telerites
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
1 1