Legal Opinion
Corning Glass Works v. Pasmantier
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided December 1, 1939PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WOOLSEY, District Judge.
For the reasons hereinafter stated my judgment in this cause is—
1. That the complaint be dismissed in so far as it claims infringement of the plaintiff’s trade-mark Resistal or its so-called flame tráde-mark.
2. That the defendants were guilty of unfair competition with the plaintiff in respect of their use of orange colored black edged labels put by them on the glass cooking ware for oven use which is the principal subject matter of this cause.
3. That accordingly the plaintiff may have an interlocutory judgment providing for an injunction against further sale of glass…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hurn v. OurslerSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Kellogg Co. v. National Biscuit Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Armstrong Paint & Varnish Works v. Nu-Enamel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Singer Manufacturing Co. v. June Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1896
- American Waltham Watch Co. v. United States Watch Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1899
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Zalkind v. ScheinmanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
- Telechron, Inc. v. Telicon Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1951
- Lucien Lelong v. George W. Button CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1943
- Elka Toy & Novelty Manufacturing Corp. v. Fisher-Price Toys, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1955
- Ingenuities Corp. of America v. Metcalf Neckwear Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1940
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.