Legal Opinion

Bisceglia Bros. Corporation v. Fruit Industries

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided September 17, 1937No. 9675PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WELSH, District Judge.

This suit was brought by the plaintiff to restrain the defendant from interfering with the sale by the plaintiff in Pennsylvania of beverage wine under the trade mark “Greystone.” The facts are complicated and the evidence voluminous, but the circumstances essential to the determination of the issue may be briefly summarized.

Since the repeal of prohibition in December, 1933, the plaintiff corporation and its predecessors, trading under the same name, have been selling “Greystone” wine to the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board for 'distribution through its 500 or more…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Hanover Star Milling Co. v. MetcalfSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  2. United Drug Co. v. Theodore Rectanus Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
  3. McLean v. FlemingSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  4. Menendez v. HoltSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  5. Saxlehner v. Eisner & Mendelson Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1900

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Gabriel v. O'HARASupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  2. Menendez v. Faber, Coe & Gregg, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1972
  3. Kirkland v. National Broadcasting Co., Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1976
  4. Plough, Inc. v. Intercity Oil Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1939
  5. Keystone MacAroni Mfg. Co. v. v. Arena & Sons, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1939

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API