Garst v. Charles
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Bill in equity, filed June 16, 1903, by the owner and manufacturer of a proprietary medicine known as phenyo caffein, made from a secret formula originated and owned by the plaintiff, the trade mark of the medicine being registered in the United States patent office and in the office of the secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, to restrain the defendant, a retail druggist, from selling the medicine for less than twenty-five cents a box or advertising it for sale at…
Read the full summary
Bill in equity, filed June 16, 1903, by the owner and manufacturer of a proprietary medicine known as phenyo caffein, made from a secret formula originated and owned by the plaintiff, the trade mark of the medicine being registered in the United States patent office and in the office of the secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, to restrain the defendant, a retail druggist, from selling the medicine for less than twenty-five cents a box or advertising it for sale at less than that price, and from inducing and procuring one Bickford or any other person to buy the medicine from the…
1Opinion of the CourtKnowlton, C. J.
The plaintiff, being the owner and manufacturer of a proprietary medicine known as phenyo caffein, sold it only to retail dealers under contracts in which they agreed not to sell it at less than a specified price, and he undertook to stipulate that purchasers from his purchasers should obtain and sell it only under such an agreement. His right to secure such advantages to himself, so far as possible by contracts in proper form, is not now questioned. See Garst v. Harris, 177 Mass. 72; Park & Sons Co. v. National Wholesale Druggists’ Association, 54 App. Div. (N. Y.) 223.
*149The defendant is a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Walker v. CroninMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- Vegelahn v. GuntnerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
- Carew v. RutherfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Plant v. WoodsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Garst v. HarrisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Beekman v. MarstersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Comerford v. MeierMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
- Corning Glass Works v. Ann & Hope, Inc. of DanversMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1973
- General Electric Co. v. Kimball Jewelers, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1956
- Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. StrausCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1906
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.