Dittgen v. Racine Paper Goods Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Wisconsin
In Equity. On final hearing. This is a final hearing in equity. The bill charges that' the defendants have been guilty of unfair trade and competition; that complainant is, and for more than 20 years last past has been, engaged in the manufacture and sale of paper cigar pouches; that for 15 years he has manufactured and sold individual cigar pouches connected in sheets; that for 5 years last past his cigar pouches have been made in accordance with letters patent No. 602,226,…
Read the full summary
In Equity. On final hearing. This is a final hearing in equity. The bill charges that' the defendants have been guilty of unfair trade and competition; that complainant is, and for more than 20 years last past has been, engaged in the manufacture and sale of paper cigar pouches; that for 15 years he has manufactured and sold individual cigar pouches connected in sheets; that for 5 years last past his cigar pouches have been made in accordance with letters patent No. 602,226, issued to him November 20, 1900, and that complainant is financially responsible; that the defendant, a Wisconsin…
1Opinion of the CourtQuarles, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above). A demurrer was interposed to the bill. The decision of Judge Seaman (164 Fed. 84) overruling the demurrer has settled the law of this case, following Farquhar v. National Harrow Company, 102 Fed. 714, 42 C. C. A. 600, 49 L. R. A. 765, Adriance Platt & Co. v. National Harrow Co., 121 Fed. 827, 58 C. C. A. 163, and Emack v. Kane (C. C.) 34 Fed. 46, distinguishing the case of Francis v. Flinn, 118 U. S. 385, 6 Sup. Ct. 1148, 30 L. Ed. 165. Therefore it only remains to determine whether the proofs sustain the substantial averments of the bill.
At the outset we…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. CoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Richmond v. IronsSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Johnson v. WatersSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Hardin v. BoydSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Adriance, Platt & Co. v. National Harrow Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1903
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- United States v. Besser Mfg. Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1951
- Maytag Co. v. Meadows Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1929
- Atlas Underwear Co. v. Cooper Underwear Co.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1913
- Sully v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 1912
- Alliance Securities Co. v. De Vilbiss Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1928
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.