Legal Opinion

Jessar Manufacturing Corp. v. Berlin

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 6, 1955No. Appeal, 308PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Bell,

Plaintiff sought and obtained- a decree in equity restraining defendants from manufacturing and selling baby auto seats which had a horse’s head on the front and reins for the child to hold.

Plaintiff is a manufacturer of baby auto seats and other toys. Early in 1954 it brought out and marketed the above-described baby auto seats. Defendants copied this product and marketed it under their own name, which was in no way similar to plaintiff’s name, claiming they had a legal right to do so, since' plaintiff’s invention was not pátehted and had not .acquired, a special…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Hanover Star Milling Co. v. MetcalfSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  2. Kellogg Co. v. National Biscuit Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. Noonan EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  4. Smith v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  5. American Clay Manufacturing Co. v. American Clay Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Van Products Co. v. General Welding & Fabricating Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  2. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Woodside v. Sun Ray Drug Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  3. Goldenstern & Cohen, Inc. v. Butler Iron & Steel Co.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1943
  4. Dorman Products, Inc. v. Dayco Products, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2010
  5. Pennsylvania Dutch Co. v. Pennsylvania Amish Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Cumberland County1974

2 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