Lipson v. Interstate Home Equipment Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
KALODNER, District Judge.
Following their bill in equity seeking preliminary and permanent injunctions against the use by defendant, an Ohio corporation, of its name “Interstate Home Equipment Co, Inc,” plaintiffs filed this Motion for Summary Judgment.
Having given careful consideration to plaintiffs’ motion, I am of the opinion it must be denied.
With respect to summary judgments, the rule is well settled as stated in Toebelman v. Missouri-Kansas Pipe Line Co, 3 Cir., 1942, 130 F.2d 1016, 1018: “It is now well settled that summary judgment may be entered for either party if the pleadings,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Whitaker v. ColemanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1940
- Toebelman v. Missouri-Kansas Pipe Line Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
- Weisser v. Mursam Shoe CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1942
- Miller v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
- Ramsouer v. Midland Valley R. Co.District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1942
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- McComb v. AibelDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1951