Mauger v. Dick
The Superior Court of New York City
The action is brought to restrain the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff’s business by threats, circulars and suits. It appears, from the pleadings and the testimony, that the defendant, under the name of Dundas Dick & Company, in the year 1865, began ijhe business of preparing and offering to the drug trade soft capsules, and that the plaintiff, from that time up to January, 1877, acted as general agent for the defendant for the sale of the said goods.
Read the full summary
The action is brought to restrain the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff’s business by threats, circulars and suits. It appears, from the pleadings and the testimony, that the defendant, under the name of Dundas Dick & Company, in the year 1865, began ijhe business of preparing and offering to the drug trade soft capsules, and that the plaintiff, from that time up to January, 1877, acted as general agent for the defendant for the sale of the said goods. Capsules, hard and soft, are known as a device in pharmacy by which disagreeable medicines are enclosed in some jujube paste, or…
1Opinion of the CourtSpeir, J.
I am unable to perceive how the plaintiff can maintain this action on any principle of equitable jurisdiction. He does not claim to restrain the use of a name or a trademark or the publication of letters, but the publication of a circular containing false and fraudulent representations that certain parties are infringing his trade-mark rights by placing on the market imitations of his soft capsules, and warning the trade that the defendant had the exclusive right to use the trade-mark “ soft capsules,” according to law, and that he would promptly punish to the full extent of the law any…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Wolfe v. . BurkeNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Towle v. TowleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
3Cited by7 opinions
- Marlin Fire Arms Co. v. . ShieldsNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
- H. E. Allen Mfg. Co. v. SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1928
- Shoemaker v. South Bend Spark Arrester Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1893
- A. Hollander Son v. Jos. HollanderNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1935
- Grand Rapids School Furniture Co. v. Haney School Furniture Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1892
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.