O. & W. Thum Co. v. A. K. Ackerman Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Ohio; Clarence W. Sessions, Judge- Suit in equity by the O. & W. Thum Company against the A. K. Ackerman Company. From the decree, plaintiff appeals.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Ohio; Clarence W. Sessions, Judge- Suit in equity by the O. & W. Thum Company against the A. K. Ackerman Company. From the decree, plaintiff appeals. This is an appeal from the decree entered in the court below upon mandate issued pursuant to opinion rendered, August 1, 1917, in the two cases of the present appellant against Dickinson and the Ackerman Company, respectively, which were commenced in separate jurisdictions and subsequently heard together in this court, as 'explained in 245…
1Per curiam
We are constrained to believe the decree is right;
1. The decree adjudges that “it is and will be an effective qualification and explanation” of the name under which “Dickinson conducts his business if, in association with and immediately following” his trade-name, viz. “ ‘Grand Rapids Sticky Fly Paper Company,’ * * * there he used” the name and word “Albert G. Dickinson, Proprietor,” provided such name and word “be printed in type as large as that in which the words” of such trade-name “are printed.” The change thus exacted is manifestly designed to break up the practice of concealing the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- People ex rel. Attorney General v. Grand Rapids Sticky Fly Paper Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1906
3Cited by1 opinion
- Dickinson v. O. & W. THUM CO.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1925