Legal Opinion
Warner Bros. v. Jantzen, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided December 31, 1956PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CASHIN, District Judge.
This is an action based upon trademark infringement and unfair competition in which an injunction, accounting and attorneys’ fees are requested. The defendant has counterclaimed, requesting cancellation of the allegedly infringed trademark, and attorneys’ fees.
Findings of Fact
1. The plaintiff, a Connecticut corporation, has, since 1902 manufactured and sold, among other products, women’s brassieres. Commencing in December 1932 and continuing to the present time, the plaintiff has used the mark “A’Lure” to identify certain of its brassieres. On December 30, 1932 the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Brothers & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Miles Shoes, Inc. v. R. H. MacY & Co., IncCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1952
- Douglas Laboratories Corp. v. Copper Tan, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1954
- Hughes v. Alfred H. Smith Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1913
3Cited by5 opinions
- The Warner Brothers Company v. Jantzen, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957
- Engineered Mechanical Services, Inc. v. Applied Mechanical Technology, Inc.District Court, M.D. Louisiana · 1984
- Aluminum Fabricating Co. v. Season-All Window Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1957
- U.S. Gold & Silver Investments, Inc. v. Director, United States MintDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1987
- The Warner Brothers Company v. Jantzen, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957