Gessler v. Grieb
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County. It appears from the record that the plaintiff is a druggist in Milwaukee, and that since April, 1888, he has manufactured and sold a medicine for headache, which he put up in small boxes, each of which contained a label of black ink on white paper, in these words: “ Gessler’s Magic Headache Wafers; a positive cure for headache and neuralgia. Never fail if taken as directed.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County. It appears from the record that the plaintiff is a druggist in Milwaukee, and that since April, 1888, he has manufactured and sold a medicine for headache, which he put up in small boxes, each of which contained a label of black ink on white paper, in these words: “ Gessler’s Magic Headache Wafers; a positive cure for headache and neuralgia. Never fail if taken as directed. Directions: To prepare the wafer, put it into a glass of water; leave there until it is perfectly soft (about to 1 minute), place it in the mouth when soft, and swallow…
1Opinion of the CourtCassoday, J.
“ It seems to be the office of a trade-mark to point out the true source, origin or ownership of the *25goods to which, the mark is applied, or to point out and designate a dealer’s place of business, distinguishing it from the business locality of other dealers.” Marshall v. Pinkham, 52 Wis. 578, 88 Am. Rep. 758. Such trade-mark usually includes the name of the manufacturer or dealer, as the best designation of such source, origin, ownership, or place of business. Howard v. Park, 21 Am. Law Reg. 644, and note. Sometimes, however, it consists of some novel device, arbitrary character, or fancy…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- McLean v. FlemingSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- United States v. SteffensSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Manufacturing Co. v. TrainerSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Goodyear's India Rubber Glove Manufacturing Co. v. Goodyear Rubber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Chadwick v. CovellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Trinidad Asphalt Mfg. Co. v. Standard Paint Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1908
- Fish Bros. Wagon v. La Belle Wagon WorksWisconsin Supreme Court · 1892
- Winston & Newell Co. v. Piggly Wiggly Northwest, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
- Brennan v. Emery-Bird-Thayer Dry-Goods Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
- Listman Mill Co. v. William Listman Milling Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1894
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.