Legal Opinion

Cantrell & Cochrane, Ltd. v. Butler

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Decided July 21, 1903PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMAS, District Judge.

The simulation of complainant’s label is obvious. It indicates intention to use complainant’s repútation for the purpose of marketing defendant’s goods. To attract attention, and to avert suspicion, or to confirm credence in his pretensions, defendant is using a label in such similitude to complainant’s well-known label that it can be differentiated only by greater attention and comparison than is bestowed by the usual customer. The label itself used by the defendant speaks and declares at once that it is calculated and intended to defraud both the complainant and…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. G. Heileman Brewing Co. v. Independent Brewing Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1911
  2. Cantrell & Cochrane, Ltd. v. Hygeia Distilled Water Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
  3. McIlhenny Co. v. BulliardDistrict Court, W.D. Louisiana · 1920

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

Powered by the Exa API