Elliott Varnish Co. v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

Citations

• 221 F. 797
• 1915 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1630

Syllabus

<p>1. Trade-Marks and Trade-Names <§=»8—Words Subject to Appbopbiaieon.</p> <p>The registered trade-mark “Roof Leak,” used in connection with roof paint, was valid.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Trade-Marks and Trade-Names, Cent. Dig. § 12; Dec. Dig. <§=>8J</p> <p><gz^For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes</p> <p>Ü. Trade-Marks and Trade-Names <@=>59—Infringement—Similarity of Names.</p> <p>Tlie registered trade-mark “Hoof Leak,” used in connection with sales of roof paint, was infringed by the use of the words “Never Leak” in connection with sales of a similar paint, as they suggested the same idea.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other eases, see Trade-Marks and Trade-Names, Cent. Dig. §§ 68-72; Dec. Dig. <S=>59.[</p> <p>8. Trade-Marks and Trade-Names <@=>40—Contract for Use of TradeMark—Termrnation.</p> <p>Where complainant, selling paint under the trade-mark “Hoof Leak,” contracted for a sale of its product by defendant, a mail order house, under the name of “Never Leak,” defendant’s right to use the words “Never Leak” did not outlast the contract, which had no further operation from the time it ceased to order complainant’s product.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Trade-Marks and Trade-Names, Cent Dig. § 45; Dec. Dig. <S=>46.]</p> <p>•<£=oFor other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes</p>