Dobbs & Co. v. Cobbs Haberdasher, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Per curiam
It is entirely apparent to this court that the defendant, a competitor of plaintiff, has adopted its corporate name with a view of profiting from the long-established and successful business of plaintiff. No person of the name of “ Cobbs ” is connected with the defendant corporation and no excuse is offered for the adoption of such name, and the use of the name “ Cobbs ” by the defendant will, in our opinion, result in serious confusion of trade and deception of the public, and the adoption *373and use by defendant of a name so similar to plaintiff’s trade name, in our opinion, constitutes an act…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Nu Enamel Corp. v. Nate Enamel Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1935
- Kane v. Roxy Theatres Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
- Miles Shoes of New York, Inc. v. Niles Bootery, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932