Lamont, Corliss & Co. v. Hershey

Citations

• 140 F. 763
• 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4828

Syllabus

<p>1. Tbade-Marks and Tbade-Names — Unfair Competition — Grounds fob Relief. '</p> <p>To make out a case of unfair or fraudulent competition there, must be an actual wrongful intent to deceive the public into the belief that the goods of the one party are the goods of the other, accompanied by such acts and devices as are likely to do so, or such duplication in form and dress of the one by the other as will produce a confusion calculated to bring this about, of which the party complained against is convicted of being willing to have the benefit.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see vol. 46, Cent. Dig. Trade-Marks- and Trade-Names, §§' 79-86.</p> <p>Unfair competition, see notes to Seheuler v. Muller, 20 C. C. A. 165 Lare v. Harper Bros., 30 C. C. A. 376.]</p> <p>2. Same — Preliminary Injunction.</p> <p>On an application for a preliminary injunction against alleged unfair-competition in the dress of goods, it should be clear that the complainant has an established and exclusive right to pack and dress his goods in the- . way he asserts, on which the defendant is deceptively trying to trade. '</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see vol. 46, Cent Dig. Trade-Marks- and Trade-Names, § 108.] ,</p> <p>3. Same — Dress oe Chocolate.</p> <p>The showing made of unfair competition, based on the alleged similarity in shape and style of packages and color and style of wrappers in which chocolate is put up for the market by complainants and defendant,, respectively, held insufficient to warrant the granting of a preliminary-injunction.</p>