Legal Opinion
Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Manufacturing Co. v. S. S. Kresge Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided May 4, 1942No. 649PublishedCited by 296 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Frankfurter
The petitioner, which manufactures and sells shoes and rubber heels, employs a trade-mark, registered under the Trade-Mark Act of 1905, 33 Stat. 724, 15 U. S. C. § 81 et seq., consisting of a red circular plug embedded in the center of a heel. The heels were not sold separately, but were attached to shoes made by the petitioner. It has spent considerable sums of money in seeking to gain the favor of the consuming public by promoting the mark as assurance of a desirable product. The respondent sold heels not made by the petitioner but bearing a mark described by the District Court as “a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Brothers & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Sheldon v. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co. v. Wagner Electric & Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Thaddeus Davids Co. v. Davids Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Straus v. Notaseme Hosiery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by296 opinions
- San Francisco Arts & Athletics, Inc. v. United States Olympic CommitteeSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Maternally Yours, Inc. v. Your Maternity Shop, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1956
- Champion Spark Plug Co. v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- James Burrough Limited and Kobrand Corporation v. Sign of the Beefeater, Inc., and Montgomery Ward & Co., IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1976
- Lindy Pen Company, Inc. Blackfeet Plastics, Inc., Cross-Appellees v. Bic Pen Corporation, Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
291 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.