Ayer v. Rushton

Citations

• 7 Daly 9

Syllabus

<p>Words in common use as descriptive of medicines for particular diseases, or which merely indicate by its common name an^ingredient of a medicine, cannot be appropriated by a manufacturer of sucli medicine as a trade-mark, nor can a combination of such words be so appropriated. Caswell v. Davis, 58 N. Y. 223, followed as controlling.</p> <p>Plaintiffs invented and prepared a medicine for chest diseases to which they gave the name of “ Cherry Pectoral,” and which was extensively known and sold as “Ayer’s Cherry Pectoralone of the ingredients was extract of wild cherry, and the word “ pectoral ” had been before the invention of plaintiffs’ medicine, applied to medicines for chest diseases. Held, that the plaintiffs could not claim the exclusive use of the words “ Cherry Pectoral ” as a trade-mark.</p>