TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Johnson v. Brunor

Johnson v. Brunor, 107 F. 466 (1901)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · Historical Federal Courts
Decided
February 9, 1901
Judges
Lacombe
Citations
107 F. 4661901 U.S. App. LEXIS 4530
Headnotes
Trade-W arks — Injunction. Injunction pendente lite will issue to restrain a defendant from selling any absorbent cotton, not manufactured by or for the complainant, in packages with a representation of a red cross, or the designation “Red Cross,” as used by plaintiff, or from selling in packages which by their" appearance are so nearly like complainant’s packages as to be calculated to deceive.
Summary
Motion for Preliminary Injunction.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Lacombe

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.

Complainant may talce an order pendente lite enjoining defendant from selling and from offering to sell any cot-ton or absorbent cotton, not manufactured by or for complainant, to the package or packages of which shall be applied, in any form or manner whatsoever, the representation of a red cross, or the designation “Red Cross”; and from continuing to offer to sell or to sell packages of cotton or absorbent cotton like the package or packages hereinbefore described as having been by the defendant offered and sold, or which, by collocation of size, shape, color, interior mode of packing, label, inscription, and symbols, are made so nearly like in appearance to complainant's package as to be calculated to mislead.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1909: 11911: 119092026peak 1909 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Capewell Horse Nail Co. v. Mooney167 F. 575 (1909)
  2. Loonen v. Deitsch189 F. 487 (1911)

Most recent

  1. Loonen v. Deitsch189 F. 487 (1911)
  2. Capewell Horse Nail Co. v. Mooney167 F. 575 (1909)

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.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list