Legal Opinion

Germanow v. Standard Unbreakable Watch Crystals, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 8, 1939Published

1Opinion of the Court

udgment affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: That the defendant simulated the plaintiffs’ catalogue and number system and issued a catalogue and comparative list so that its customers, if so inclined, might palm off on the public its crystals as and for the crystals of the plaintiffs and that such acts were an infringement of the plaintiffs’ property rights and constituted unfair competition find support in the evidence. The fact that the palming off was to be done by the jeweler instead of the defendant is no defense. The vice lies in defendant’s placing in the hands of its customers the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. A. L. A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  2. International News Service v. Associated PressSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
  3. William R. Warner & Co. v. Eli Lilly & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
  4. Taendsticksfabriks Akticbolagat Vulcan v. MyersNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
  5. N. K. Fairbank Co. v. R. W. Bell Manuf'g Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1896

4 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