Legal Opinion

Houbigant, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided January 27, 1944No. 101PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

In March 1938 the Federal Trade Commission issued its complaint against the petitioners charging them with the use of unfair methods of competition in commerce in violation of section 5 of the Act of September 26, 1914, IS U.S.C.A. § 45. After hearings the Commission on April 16, 1942, made findings of fact and issued its order requiring the petitioners to desist (1) from using upon their products the words “Paris” or “Paris, France” or other terms indicative of foreign origin, and (2) from using the terms “Ploubigant”, “Cheramy” or any other French or foreign words as trade names for toilet…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. El Moro Cigar Co. v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1939
  2. Justin Haynes & Co. v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
  3. Fioret Sales Co. v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1938
  4. H. N. Heusner & Son v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1939
  5. Fresh Grown Preserve Corp. v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1942

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Charles of the Ritz Distributors Corp. v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
  2. California Apparel Creators v. Wieder of California, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
  3. Harsam Distributors, Inc., a Corporation, and Harry Wagonfeld v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1959
  4. California Apparel Creators v. Wieder of California, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API