Legal Opinion
Cluett, Peabody & Co. v. Spetalnik
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided March 25, 1938No. 8465PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CAMPBELL, District Judge.
This is a motion made by the plaintiff for a preliminary injunction restraining and enjoining defendant, Max Spetalnik, his agents, servants, and attorneys, and all others acting by or under his direction or authority, from selling, offering, exposing or advertising for sale, or causing to be sold, offered, exposed or advertised for sale, any articles of apparel or men’s furnishings not made by the plaintiff bearing a trademark or trade name consisting of or including the word “Arrow”, or any other trademark or trade name so similar to plaintiff’s “Arrow” trademark as…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Rosenberg Bros. & Co. v. ElliottCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1925
- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. A. & P. Radio Stores, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1937
- Rice & Hutchins, Inc. v. Vera Shoe Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1923
- Pennsylvania R. v. Erie R.District Court, E.D. New York · 1933
- Cluett, Peabody & Co. v. WrightCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1931
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Moxie Co. v. Noxie Kola Co. of New York, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1939
- Parke, Davis & Co. v. Amalgamated Health & Drug Plan, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1962