· 2/21/1916

Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Brothers & Co.

Citations

240 U.S. 251
36 S. Ct. 269
60 L. Ed. 629
1916 U.S. LEXIS 1448

Syllabus

The words “The American Girl” as applied to women’s shoes is not a geographical or descriptive term signifying that the articles are ■ manufactured in America, or intended to be .sold therein; nor does it indicate qualities or characteristics of the article. In this ease, held that the term “Américan Girl” is a fanciful designa-’ tibn, arbitrarily selected by a concern manufacturing shoes to designate their product, and as such it is subject to appropriation as a trade-mark for that purpose. The record in this case shows that the term' “American Girl” was legitimately appropriated and used as a trade-mark by the complainant and those under whom it claims.- The jurisdiction.of this court to review judgments and decrees of’ ■ the Circuit Courts of Appeals on certiorari under § 240, Jud; Code, . is to be exercised sparingly ánd only in cases of peculiar gravity and . general importance and in order to secure, uniformity of decision, and the refusal of the application is in no case equivalent to affirmance. • •The fact that the decree' sought to be reviewed' is not a final one fur- ' nishes sufficient ground for refusing the petition. Ón certiorari, this court is called upon to notice and rectify any error that may have occurred in- interlocutory proceedings, and is. not bound to consider that an interlocutory decree settled the law of the case because it refused to review it on certiorari; The right to use a trade-mark is property, of which the owner is entitled to exclusive enjoyment to the extent that it has been actually used, and an infringer is required in equity to account for and yield ■up his gains to the true owner. In this case, held that one using the label “American Lady” for shoes manufactured and sold by it infringed the rights of complainant as owner of the trade-mark “American Girl.” While the decree of the court below was based on profits gained by defendant in unfair competition by using an im

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that, as a matter of law, a trademark used on shoes, “The American Girl,” was not a “geographical or descriptive term”
finding that apportionment was “inherently impossible” and “no formula [was] suggested by which it could be accomplished”
noting the critical difference between the mark “American Shoes,” which could be geographically descriptive, and “American Girl Shoes,” which could not be
explaining, in a trademark case, that if equity jurisdiction rests on another basis, such as “the right to an injunction,” the equity court, “for the purpose of administering complete relief,” may award “profits . . . as an equitable measure of compensation”
the right to an infringer’s profits is grounded in most cases on the right to an injunction
the term THE AMERICAN GIRL held not to be “a geographical or descriptive term” without reference to survey evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Pitney

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.