Legal Opinion
B. Sanfield, Incorporated v. Finlay Fine Jewelry Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided July 10, 2001No. 99-4234PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge.
Finlay Fine Jewelry, which sells inexpensive items containing gold at kiosks in department stores nationwide, regularly offers its products at 50% off. Half off what?, one may ask. A discount supposes a regular price, and it developed in a bench trial in this suit under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), and related state laws, that Finlay does not have one. Every once in a while (but never on a Saturday or during December) Finlay removes the “sale” signs and tries to sell its items at higher prices, but less than 3% of its sales are made that way — and…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Anderson v. City of Bessemer CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Lujan v. National Wildlife FederationSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Federal Trade Commission v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1965
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- TrafficSchool.com, Inc. v. Edriver Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Jerry L. Crabill v. Trans Union, L.L.C.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2001
- Furst v. Einstein Moomjy, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2004
- Su Yeun Kim v. Carter's Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
- Furst v. Einstein Moomjy, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2004
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.