Milwaukee Nut Company v. Brewster Food Service

How courts have described this case

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

• by selecting a suggestive mark, plaintiff was not entitled to same scope of protection afforded an arbitrary mark
• opposer acted at its peril in choosing a highly suggestive mark
• “appellee, in adopting a word which is highly suggestive to the trade in which it was catering, ran the risk of having similar merchandise sold by others for the same purpose to the same trade offered to the witness when he requested ‘BEER NUTS.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).