Legal Opinion
Castrol, Inc. v. Quaker State Corporation, Quaker State Oil Refining Corporation, and Grey Advertising, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided October 7, 1992No. 1667, Docket 92-7347PublishedCited by 115 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WALKER, Circuit Judge:
A Quaker State television commercial asserts that “tests prove” its 10W-30 motor oil provides better protection against engine wear at start-up. In a thoughtful opinion reported at 1992 WL 47981 (S.D.N.Y. March 2, 1992), the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Charles S. Haight, Judge) held that plaintiff-appellee Castrol, Inc. (“Cas-trol”) had proven this advertised claim literally false pursuant to § 43(a) of the Lan-ham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) (1988). The district court issued a March 20, 1992 Order preliminarily enjoining…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Anderson v. City of Bessemer CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- The Coca-Cola Company v. Tropicana Products, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
- Alpo Petfoods, Inc. v. Ralston Purina CompanyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1990
- McNeilab Inc. v. American Home Products CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1988
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by115 opinions
- United Industries Corp. v. Clorox Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1998
- Castrol Inc. v. Pennzoil Company and Pennzoil Products CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Time Warner Cable, Inc. v. DirecTV, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2007
- Southland Sod Farms v. Stover Seed Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
- Southland Sod Farms v. Stover Seed Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
110 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.