Bailly v. Nashawannuck Manufacturing Co.
Bailly v. Nashawannuck Manuf'g Co.
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Babbett, J.
The word “hygieniques,” as applied to suspenders, is not descriptive, in the ordinary sense. The word “elastic” would be. The word “hygieniques” is suggestive of the good quality of the suspenders, and of its usefulness; but it does not directly characterize the article, nor the methods which tend to make it healthful. At the outside, such word is descriptive only in a modified or indirect sense, and, as it does not monopolize a part of the language essential or appropriate to describe the article, it may become the subject of a valid trade-mark. Words which are but inferentially or remotely descriptive, indicating neither origin nor ownership, but merely some special quality or peculiarity of the article itself, may properly be regarded as fanciful or arbitrary in the legal sense. The case on this head is within the principles enunciated in Selchow v. Baker, 93 N. Y. 59 , and the injunction should run against the defendant. Upon the facts, it is a barefaced attempt to defraud the plaintiff, and to palm off the defendant’s goods as his.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.