Legal Opinion
Maybelline Co. v. Noxell Corp.
District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Decided August 25, 1986No. LR-C-86-455PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION ON MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
ROY, District Judge.
Plaintiff has filed a complaint and motion for preliminary injunction alleging violations by the defendants under the provisions of the Lanham Act and unfair competition under common law. A hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction was held on August 20 and 21, after sufficient notice was given to all parties involved.
According to the allegations of the complaint, plaintiff, Maybelline Co., is a Delaware corporation whose principal place of business and only factory in the United States is located in North Little Rock,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Dataphase Systems, Inc. v. C L Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1981
- Toro Co. v. Textron, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1980
- Emra Corp. v. Superclips Ltd.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1983
3Cited by4 opinions
- Missouri Housing Development Commission v. Edward W. Brice, Jr., Paul Goodrich, Joseph TimiltyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1990
- Maybelline Co. v. Noxell Corporation Ssc & B: Lintas WorldwideCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1987
- Resolution Trust Corp. v. SullivanDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1991
- Missouri Housing Development Commission v. Edward W. Brice, Jr., Paul Goodrich, Joseph TimiltyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1990