L. P. Larson, Jr., Co. v. Wm. Wrigley, Jr., Co.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Appeals from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Illinois. Bill by the William Wrigley, Jr., Company against the L. P. Earson, Jr., Company, together with another bill by the same complainant against the same defendant, which counterclaimed. The first bill was dismissed, and complainant appeals; while the second bill and counterclaim were dismissed, and defendant appeals — -the appeals being consolidated.
1Opinion of the Court
BAKER, Circuit Judge.
In No. 2500 Wrigley Company appeals from the final dismissal of its bill against Earson Company for alleged unfair competition and infringement of trade-mark.
[1, 2] “Spearmint” was counted on as a trade-mark and was charged to be infringed by “Peptomint.” First. “Spearmint” is a common noun, denoting flavor, and is therefore not susceptible of appropriation as a trade-mark. Second. “Peptomint” is so different in appearance and sound that there -yould be no infringement, even if “Spearmint” were a proper trade-mark.
[3, 4] Respecting unfair competition, an inspection of the…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Oscanyan v. Arms Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Coppell v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Richardson v. BuhlMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Bartle v. NuttSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
- C. F. Simmons Medicine Co. v. Mansfield Drug Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1893
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- Kanopka v. KanopkaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
- France Mfg. Co. v. Jefferson Electric Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1939
- Sutherland v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1941
- Vallejos v. C. E. Glass Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1978
- National Fruit Product Co. v. Dwinell-Wright Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1942
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.