Legal Opinion
Cheney Bros. v. Doris Silk Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided October 21, 1929No. 89PublishedCited by 65 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
L. HAND, Circuit Judge.
The plaintiff, a corporation, is a manufacturer of silks, which puts out each season many new patterns, designed to attract purchasers by their novelty and beauty. Most of these fail in that purpose, so that not much more than a fifth catch the public fancy. Moreover, they have only a short life, for the most part no more than a single season of eight or nine months. It is in practice impossible, and it would be very onerous if it were not, to secure design patents upon all of these; it would also be impossible to know in advance which would sell well, and patent only…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- International News Service v. Associated PressSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Board of Trade of Chicago v. Christie Grain & Stock Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Hunt v. New York Cotton ExchangeSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Crescent Tool Co. v. Kilborn & Bishop Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1917
- Flagg Manufacturing Co. v. HolwayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- United States v. United Shoe MacHinery Corp.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1953
- National Basketball Ass'n v. Motorola, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
- Pagliero v. Wallace China Co., LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1952
- Audio Fidelity, Inc., a Corporation v. High Fidelity Recordings, Inc., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
- RCA Mfg. Co. v. WhitemanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.