Legal Opinion

Direct Service Oil Co. v. Honzay

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 12, 1941No. 32,858PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Peterson, Justice.

Plaintiff sues to enjoin defendant from using in connection with the operation of his filling' station the words “Direct Service,” “Direct Service Station,” and “Direct Service Oil Company,” to which it claims the exclusive right as its tradename in virtue of prior appropriation and use for many years in connection with its business.

Since 1926 plaintiff has been engaged in the business of selling at wholesale and retail gasoline, grease, oil, tires, radios, and automobile accessories. In August 1937 defendant commenced to operate a filling station in Olivia in which he…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. United Drug Co. v. Theodore Rectanus Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
  2. The Children's Bootery v. SutkerSupreme Court of Florida · 1926
  3. United States Printing & Lithograph Co. v. Griggs, Cooper & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1929
  4. Kaufman v. KaufmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
  5. Eastern Outfitting Co. v. ManheimWashington Supreme Court · 1910

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Howards Clothes, Inc. v. Howard Clothes Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1952
  2. Katz Drug Co. v. KatzDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1950
  3. Winston & Newell Co. v. Piggly Wiggly Northwest, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
  4. Houston v. BerdeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
  5. Shoppers Fair of Arkansas, Inc. v. Sanders CompanyDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1962

4 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