Legal Opinion

Mundorff Beverage Co. v. Seven-Up Wilmington Co.

Court of Chancery of Delaware

Decided August 16, 1940PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

The Vice-Chancellor :

The main question is whether an agreement between complainant and the individual respondent, Imbesi, is valid and binding so as to confer upon complainant the right, enforceable by this court, to prevent respondents from selling or distributing a certain beverage within the City of Wilmington.

It is alleged in the bill that on March 30, 1936, “the complainant entered into an agreement with respondent Imbesi, whereby your complainant was extended an exclusive selling license for a trade-marked carbonated beverage known as ‘7-Up,’ in a territory which consisted of the City…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. United States v. SteffensSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  2. Armstrong Paint & Varnish Works v. Nu-Enamel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. St. Paul Plow Works v. StarlingSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  4. Jordan v. Buick Motor Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1935
  5. Raisler Sprinkler Co. v. Automatic Sprinkler Co. of AmericaSuperior Court of Delaware · 1934

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Equity Corp. v. GrovesCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1947

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

Powered by the Exa API