Heath v. Wright
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.
KANE, District Judge.
It is impossible for me to distinguish this case in principle from that of Fowle v. Spear [Case No. 4,996], which was before me on a similar motion some years ago. I then refused an injunction against the vendor of a patent medicine at the suit of his brother quack, who complained that his label and envelope of certificates had been imitated, on the ground that the special action of chancery could not be involved in a controversy which had so little merit to commend it on either side. Injunction refused.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
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.