Cauffman v. Schuler

Citations

• 123 F. 205
• 1903 U.S. App. LEXIS 4894

Syllabus

<p>1. Unfair Competition—Imitation of Label.</p> <p>To warrant restraining the imitation of the label on complainant’s goods, it is sufficient if the imitation be close enough to deceive the unwary, incautious, or ignorant purchaser.</p> <p>2. Same—Sufficiency of Evidence.</p> <p>Complainant was the manufacturer of a bottled beverage known to the trade as “CaufCman’s Ginger Brandy.” Defendant sold a similar article; his label being of the same size, shape, and color as that of complainant. The color, size, and position of the printed matter were alike. The description setting forth the nature and quality of the article, as well as the division of the label into lines, and its decoration with scrolls, and the location of the manufacturer’s title, were similar. Defendant used a “caution” label of the same size, color, and arrangement of printing as complainant, and possessing a subscription of the maker’s title. The word “Imperial” was substituted for “Cauffman’s,” and the word “Celebrated” was omitted, and the wording of the “caution” and the name subscribed thereto were dissimilar. Held, that defendant’s use of his label would be enjoined.</p> <p>¶ 1. Unfair competition, see notes to Scheuer v. Muller, 20 C. C. A. 165; Lare v. Harper, 30 C. C. A. 376.</p>