Legal Opinion
Gruen Marketing Corp. v. Benrus Watch Co., Inc.
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided February 27, 1997No. 96 C 7599PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
HART, District Judge.
Gruen Marketing Corporation (“Gruen”) brings this action against defendants Benrus Watch Company, Inc. (“Benrus”), Hampden Watch Co., Inc. (“Hampden”), Irving Wein, Joseph Wein and Jim Herbert. Gruen alleges that defendants violated the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114, 1125(a), the Illinois Deceptive Trade Practices Act, 815 ILCS 510/2, the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act, 815 ILCS 505/2 and Illinois common law. Defendants move to dismiss Gruen’s complaint. 1
I. ALLEGED FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Gruen, a Delaware corporation, is in the…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination UnitSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- FW/PBS, Inc. v. City of DallasSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Emil J. Bartholet v. Reishauer A.G. (Zurich) and Reishauer Corporation (Elgin)Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992
- Mavourneen Doherty v. City of Chicago, Graham C. Grady, Judith C. RiceCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1996
- Howard L. Jackson v. Marion CountyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1995
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Specht v. Google, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2009
- Prince of Peace Enterprises, Inc. v. Top Quality Food Market, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2011
- National Licensing Ass'n v. Inland Joseph Fruit Co.District Court, E.D. Washington · 2004
- Bliss Clearing Niagara, Inc. v. Midwest Brake Bond Co.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 2004
- Adamczyk v. Lever Brothers Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1998
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.