Congress and Empire Spring Co. v. High Rock Congress Spring Co.
New York Supreme Court
APPEAL by the plaintiff from an order of the special term dissolving an ex parte injunction restraining the defendant from using the trade-mark of the plaintiff, and from selling as “ Congress water,” other water than the natural water of the Congress Spring at Saratoga Springs. The motion was based upon complaint, answer and affidavits.
Read the full summary
APPEAL by the plaintiff from an order of the special term dissolving an ex parte injunction restraining the defendant from using the trade-mark of the plaintiff, and from selling as “ Congress water,” other water than the natural water of the Congress Spring at Saratoga Springs. The motion was based upon complaint, answer and affidavits. The complaint averred the plaintiff to he the owner of a spring discovered in 1792, and then named Congress Spring; that its waters were widely known as “ Congress water,” and as possessing peculiar medicinal virtues; that there were many other mineral…
1Opinion of the CourtBosekrans, J.
It is well settled that a court of equity will not exercise its power to restrain the use of a trade mark, the exclusive right to which is claimed by the plaintiff, unless a good legal title thereto is alleged in the complaint, and the court can see from the plaintiff’s own statements that the right which he seeks to have protected clearly belongs to him, and has been infringed. (25 Am. Jurist, 279.) Bor will the court interfere by injunction when such title is alleged, if the right is denied by the defendant, or is rendered doubtful. (2 Sandf. 599.) Wolfe v. Goulard, (18 How. Pr. 64,)…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Amoskeag Manufacturing Co. v. SpearThe Superior Court of New York City · 1849
- Fetridge v. WellsThe Superior Court of New York City · 1857
- Clark v. ClarkNew York Supreme Court · 1857
- Stokes v. LandgraffNew York Supreme Court · 1853
- Brooklyn White Lead Co. v. MasuryNew York Supreme Court · 1857
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Hanover Star Milling Co. v. MetcalfSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- O'Rourke v. Central City Soap Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan · 1885
- Hegeman & Co. v. HegemanNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1880
- Cigar-Makers' Protective Union v. ConhaimSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Insurance Oil Tank Co. v. ScottSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1881
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.