Legal Opinion
California Fruit Growers Exchange v. Windsor Beverages, Ltd.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided February 28, 1941No. 7422PublishedCited by 36 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LINDLEY, District Judge.
Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment dismissing for want of equity their complaint seeking to restrain trade-mark infringement and unfair, competition upon the part of defendants. The court found that defendants’ products “are different from plaintiffs’ ”; that the latter have a right to use the trade-mark Sunkist “because of their particular class” and that the name has not acquired a secondary meaning insofar as plaintiffs’ products are concerned. Plaintiffs insist that the evidence does not support these findings; but that the proof discloses that defendants’…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Armstrong Paint & Varnish Works v. Nu-Enamel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Aunt Jemima Mills Co. v. Rigney & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1917
- Vogue Co. v. Thompson-Hudson Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1924
- L. E. Waterman Co. v. GordonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934
- Wall v. Rolls-Royce of America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1925
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- The Forum Corporation of North America v. The Forum, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1990
- Sweetarts, a Corporation v. Sunline, Inc., and Menlo F. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1967
- Brooks Bros. v. Brooks Clothing of California, Ltd.District Court, S.D. California · 1945
- Dwinell-Wright Co. v. National Fruit Product Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1944
- Helene Curtis Industries, Inc. v. Church & Dwight Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1977
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.