Legal Opinion
Deere & Co. v. MTD Products, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 11, 1994No. 94 Civ. 2322 (LMM)PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER
McKENNA, District Judge.
Plaintiff Deere & Company (“Deere”) initiated this action by filing the Complaint, along with an Order to Show Cause seeking a Preliminary Injunction and a Temporary Restraining Order, on April 1, 1994. Plaintiff alleges that the actions of Defendant MTD Products, Inc. (“MTD”), in broadcasting or causing to be broadcast the television commercial at issue, violate Section 43 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), and the New York anti-dilution law, N.Y.Gen.Bus. Law Art. 24 § 368-d (McKinney 1984), and constitute unfair…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Polaroid Corporation v. Polarad Electronics CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961
- Jackson Dairy, Inc. v. H. P. Hood & Sons, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1979
- The Coca-Cola Company v. Tropicana Products, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
- W.W.W. Pharmaceutical Company, Inc. v. The Gillette CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Nintendo Co., Ltd., Nintendo of America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1984
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Deere & Company v. Mtd Products, Inc., Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- Nabisco, Inc. v. PF Brands, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
- Clinique Laboratories, Inc. v. Dep Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- Ringling Bros.-Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc. v. B.E. Windows Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- Beastie Boys v. Monster Energy Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 2014
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.