Legal Opinion

Browne-Vintners Co. v. National Distillers & Chemical Corp.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided May 15, 1957PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McGOHEY, District Judge.

This is an action for injunctive relief and damages for alleged infringement of the three registered trade-marks applied to champagne, “G. H. Mumm & Co.,” “Mumm” and “Mumm-Reims”; and for unfair competition. Jurisdiction rests on the trade-mark laws of the United States and diverse citizenship of the parties.

The defendant, by selling Rhine wine under the name “G. H. v. Mumm,” has competed unfairly with the plaintiffs and infringed their trade-mark “G. H. Mumm & Co.” A decree of injunction will be entered. As the plaintiffs showed no pecuniary loss, an accounting will…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Hanover Star Milling Co. v. MetcalfSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  2. United Drug Co. v. Theodore Rectanus Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
  3. McLean v. FlemingSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  4. Menendez v. HoltSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  5. Saxlehner v. Eisner & Mendelson Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1900

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Quabaug Rubber Company v. Fabiano Shoe Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1977
  2. Chandon Champagne Corp. v. San Marino Wine Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1964
  3. Dep Corporation v. Interstate Cigar Company, Inc. And L. S. Amster & Company, Inc., DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
  4. Taussig v. Wellington Fund, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1960
  5. Silverstar Enterprises, Inc. v. AdayDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1982

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

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

Powered by the Exa API