Conrad v. Joseph Uhrig Brewing Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court. The combination used is not valid as a trademark ; and an action at law will not lie for the infringement of a label. —Fallcenburg v. Lucy, 35 Cal. 52 ; Browne on T.-M., sect. 137. The plaintiff’s label or trade-mark contains a misrepresentation calculated to deceive the public, and is not entitled to protection. —Fetridge v. Wells, 4 Abb. Pr. 144; Lidding v. How, 8 Sim. 479 ; Perry v. Truefitt, 6 Beav. 66 ; Partridge v. Mench, How.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court. The combination used is not valid as a trademark ; and an action at law will not lie for the infringement of a label. —Fallcenburg v. Lucy, 35 Cal. 52 ; Browne on T.-M., sect. 137. The plaintiff’s label or trade-mark contains a misrepresentation calculated to deceive the public, and is not entitled to protection. —Fetridge v. Wells, 4 Abb. Pr. 144; Lidding v. How, 8 Sim. 479 ; Perry v. Truefitt, 6 Beav. 66 ; Partridge v. Mench, How. App. Cas. 547 ; Phalonv. Wright, 5 Pa. 464; Leather Go. v. American Go., 1 Hen. & M. 271 ; s. c. 10 Jur. (n. s.) 82; s.…
1Opinion of the CourtBakewell, J.
This is an action in the nature of an action of deceit, for damages for using what the plaintiff in his petition claimed *280as his trade-mark. The answer was a general denial. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $4,175.
It appears that plaintiff had been for many years engaged in the wine and liquor business in St. Louis, on a. large scale, under the trade name of C. Conrad & Co. For nearly two years before the institution of this suit he had been putting up an excellent quality of beer, which he had, at great expense, introduced to the trade; and which was very favorably received…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Boardman v. Meriden Britannia Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1868
- Burke v. CassinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
- Walton v. CrowleyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1856
- Doolittle v. NaylorThe Superior Court of New York City · 1857
3Cited by6 opinions
- C. F. Simmons Medicine Co. v. Mansfield Drug Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1893
- Gardella v. Log Cabin Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1937
- Drake Medicine Co. v. GlessnerOhio Supreme Court · 1903
- McCann v. AnthonyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
- Anheuser-Busch Brewing Ass'n v. Fred Miller Brewing Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Wisconsin · 1898
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.