Tonka Corporation v. Tonk-A-Phone, Inc., Robert Albertson, D/B/A Tonka Tools, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Lanham Act did not preempt recovery of attorney fees under Minnesota’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act
• holding that the Lanham Act did not preempt recovery of attorney fees under Minnesota's Deceptive Trade Practices Act
• finding that the availability of attorney’s fees under the MDTPA for trademark infringement did not conflict with the provision in the Lanham Act that limited the recovery of fees to “exceptional” cases
• injunction that broadly enjoined use of Tonka name was necessary to prevent continued infringement of that mark

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).