Legal Opinion
Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc. v. 1-800 Contacts, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Decided July 29, 2002No. 02-10322PublishedCited by 179 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BIRCH, Circuit Judge:
In this interlocutory appeal, 1-800 CONTACTS, Inc. (“1-800”) argues that the district court erred when it issued a preliminary injunction forbidding 1-800 from making certain statements about the products and services of Johnson & Johnson Vision , Care, Inc. (“J&J”). The district court based its 'injunction on the conclusion that three of the advertisements used by 1-800 included false statements about J&J, and as such violated § 43(a) of the Lan-ham Act, codified at 15 U.S.C. 1125(a). 1 Because we conclude that the district court erred in applying the law, we VACATE the…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Anderson v. City of Bessemer CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- United Industries Corp. v. Clorox Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1998
- Castrol Inc. v. Pennzoil Company and Pennzoil Products CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Alpo Petfoods, Inc. v. Ralston Purina CompanyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1990
- Johnson & Johnson v. Smithkline Beecham Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by179 opinions
- Hickson Corp. v. Northern Crossarm Co.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2004
- Klay v. United Healthgroup, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2004
- North American Medical Corp. v. Axiom Worldwide, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2008
- Solantic, LLC v. City of Neptune BeachCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2005
- Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. HBS International Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2018
174 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.