Legal Opinion

Clairol Inc. v. Suburban Cosmetics and Beauty Supply, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Illinois

Decided January 16, 1968No. 67 C 2028PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

WILL, District Judge.

This is an unfair competition and unfair business practices action. Plaintiff, Clairol Incorporated, is seeking to enjoin the defendant, Suburban Cosmetics and Beauty Supply, Inc., from offering for sale or selling to the general public (i. e., persons other than licensed beauticians) plaintiff’s coal tar dye products, including its “Miss Clairol Hair Color Bath,” which have been specially packaged, labeled and distributed by plaintiff for professional use only. The plaintiff also seeks an award of its actual damages, an accounting of defendant’s alleged…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Gully v. First Nat. Bank in MeridianSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  2. Hurn v. OurslerSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  3. Pullman Co. v. JenkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  4. Pan American Petroleum Corp. v. Superior Court of Del. for New Castle Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
  5. Orthopedic Equipment Co., Incorporated v. Dennis EutslerCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1960

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Pacific Trading Company v. Wilson and Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1976
  2. Bailey v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1995
  3. National Women's Health Network, Inc. v. A. H. Robins Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1982
  4. Cross v. Board of Supervisors of San Mateo CountyDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1968
  5. Gelley v. Astra Pharmaceutical Products, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1979

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API