Legal Opinion
Manhattan Shirt Co. v. Sarnoff-Irving Hat Stores, Inc.
Court of Chancery of Delaware
Decided January 17, 1933PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor :
The complainant does not deny the execution of the contracts of 1913 and 1920. It makes no contention that the respective rights of the parties, as defined by the contracts, to the use of the mark “Manhattan” as a label on men’s wear, the field of its enjoyment and the method of its display, have been in any sense altered by mutual consent. The contracts are conceded to possess today as full a measure of whatever vigor the law allows to them as they possessed when the parties entered into them.
The complainant denies, however, that the contracts ever had any validity in law. It…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Canal Co. v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Florence Mfg. Co. v. J. C. Dowd & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1910
- Federal Trade Commission v. KlesnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Manhattan Medicine Co. v. WoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- French Republic v. Saratoga Vichy Spring Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1903
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Coca-Cola Co. v. Nehi Corp.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1944
- Delancey Kosher Restaurant & Caterers Corp. v. GlucksternNew York Court of Appeals · 1953
- Air Reduction Company v. Airco Supply CompanyCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1969
- Manhattan Shirt Co. v. Sarnoff-Irving Hat Stores, Inc.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1933