Legal Opinion
Remcraft Lighting Products, Inc. v. Maxim Lighting, Inc.
District Court, S.D. Florida
Decided February 22, 1989No. 87-2436-CIVPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
SPELLMAN, District Judge.
ORDER DENYING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. The Defendant argues that the undisputed facts in this case require that summary judgment be granted in the Defendant’s favor.
Background
The Plaintiff (Remcraft) sued the Defendant (Maxim) for permanent injunctive relief and for money damages based upon alleged trade dress infringement under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)). There are three lamps which are in dispute: 1) the Remcraft Swedish Modern bullets; 2) the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- John H. Harland Company, Cross-Appellant v. Clarke Checks, Inc., Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1983
- Ambrit, Inc. v. Kraft, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1986
- E. Remy Martin & Co., S.A. v. Shaw-Ross International Imports, Inc., and Roger Myers D/B/A F. Remy & CieCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1985
- University of Georgia Athletic Association, Etc. v. Bill Laite, Individually and D/B/A Bill Laite Distributing Co.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1985
- Brooks Shoe Manufacturing Co., Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation, Plaintiff v. Suave Shoe Corporation, a Florida CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1983
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bauer Lamp Co., Inc. v. Martin Shaffer, Howard Levi, Shaffer & Levi, Inc., a Florida Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1991
- Monsanto Co. v. CampuzanoDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2002
- Monsanto Co. v. CampuzanoDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2002