Legal Opinion

Umpqua Broccoli Exchange v. Um-Qua Valley Broccoli Growers

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 24, 1926PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBean, J.

Plaintiff maintains that by reason of the fact that it first adopted the name “Umpqua Broccoli Exchange” as its corporate name and had built up a good reputation under such name the defendant should be enjoined from using as its corporate name any name similar to plaintiffs; that the use of the name so similar to plaintiff by defendant amounts to a piracy of plaintiff’s name in business; that it is a fraud upon the plaintiff and is unfair competition. Defendant maintains there is no such similarity between the names “Umpqua Broccoli Exchange” and “Um-Qua Valley Broccoli Growers” as to justify…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Canal Co. v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
  2. Elgin National Watch Co. v. Illinois Watch Case Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1901
  3. Standard Paint Co. v. Trinidad Asphalt Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
  4. Herring-Hall-Marvin Safe Co. v. Hall's Safe Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
  5. L. E. Waterman Co. v. Modern Pen Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1914

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. American Automobile Ass'n v. American Automobile Owners Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Dimitroff v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1957
  3. Federal Securities Co. v. Federal Securities Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Junior Food Stores of W. Fla. v. Jr. Food Stores, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1969
  5. The 88% STORES, INC. v. MartinezOregon Supreme Court · 1961

10 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