E. W. Burt & Co. v. Coes & Young Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtDeCourcy, J.
This is a bill in equity brought to restrain the defendant from using the trade-name “Flexible Arch,” and from advertising its shoes by means of a pictorial representation of a shoe bent at the arch thereof. The case was referred to a master and subsequently was heard on the plaintiff’s exceptions to the master’s report, by a single justice of this court.* The exceptions were overruled, the master’s report confirmed, and a final decree was entered dismissing the bill.
The plaintiff’s appeal from the decree does not bring the evidence before us, and we cannot consider the exceptions based on…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Kaatz v. CurtisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
- Murphy v. MooreMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
- Rosen v. MayerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
- In re Irving Drew Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1924
- Farrar v. PillsburyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922