Legal Opinion
Rubyette Co. v. Vineland Products Co.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided March 24, 1931PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CLARK, District Judge.
The principal case gives some evidence, at least, that all the products of the California vineyards are not used in accordance with the terms of section 29 of title 2 of the National Prohibition Act (27 USCA § 46). The litigation is twofold: Trade-mark and/or trade-name, with its usual concomitant unfair competition, and under a patent for the process used in preparing the produet to which the name has been given. This product is a dried and skinless grape put up in small jars or bottles and artificially colored. We understand that these grapes are intended more for…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- American Fruit Growers, Inc. v. Brogdex Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Lambert Pharmacal Co. v. Bolton Chemical Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1915
3Cited by2 opinions
- Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Overman Cushion Tire Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1937
- Pecheur Lozenge Co. v. National Candy Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941