Carney Hospital v. McDonald
| Decision Date | 26 May 1917 |
| Citation | 227 Mass. 231 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
| Parties | CARNEY HOSPITAL & others v. ANNA L. McDONALD. |
March 15 1917.
Present: RUGG, C J., DE COURCY, CROSBY, PIERCE, & CARROLL, JJ.
Trade Name. Unfair Competition. Corporation, Name. Name.
From findings of a master to whom was referred a suit in equity by a corporation, Carney Hospital, of Boston to enjoin the defendant from conducting in Boston for profit a lodging house and registry for nurses under the name, "Carney Graduate Nurses' Club," or "Nurses' Club Carney
Grads.," it appeared that the business conducted by the defendant never had been mistaken for the Carney Hospital, that a method of listing in the telephone directory was not liable to lead to its being so mistaken, that the defendant had made no false representations as to the school in which nurses furnished by her were trained, that the use by her of the name "Carney" in connection with her business interfered in no way with the enjoyment of any rights by the plaintiff and that the use of the name "Carney" in connection with the defendant's business "connotes the
Carney Hospital in a limited sense only" by importing the idea that at the defendant's establishment Carney Hospital nurses could be secured.
Held, that there was no ground for enjoining the business of the defendant as unlawfully competing with the plaintiff, because it was plain that the plaintiff and the defendant were not conducting competitive businesses and that the defendant had not misled the public to the belief that the defendant's business was conducted under the auspices of the plaintiff.
The provisions of R.L.c. 72, Section 5, in substance that no person shall assume or continue to use in business in this Commonwealth the name "of any other person, either alone or in connection with his own or with any other name or designation, without the consent in writing of such person or of his legal representatives," do not give to an incorporated hospital named "Carney Hospital" a right to object to the use without its permission, by a woman conducting a lodging house and nurses' registry, of the business name "Carney Graduate Nurses' Club" or
"Nurses' Club, Carney Grads.," because the word "Carney" is not the corporation's name within the meaning of the statute.
BILL IN EQUITY, filed in the Superior Court on August 9, 1915, by the Carney Hospital, and Carney Hospital Nurses' Alumnae, Inc., corporations having usual places of business in Boston, Katherine Moynihan and Anne M. Devanney, the last two alleging themselves to be nurses graduated from the Carney Hospital Nurses' Training School for Nurses and to be bringing the bill for themselves "and in behalf of all other persons having a like interest who may be made parties thereto," to enjoin the defendant from using the name, Carney Graduate Nurses' Club.
The suit was referred to a master, and, upon the filing of his report, was heard by Jenney, J., upon the report and exceptions by the plaintiffs thereto. The exceptions were overruled and the report was confirmed, and the final decree quoted in the opinion was entered. The defendant appealed.
D. E. Irwin, for the defendant. D. M. Lyons, for the plaintiffs.
The case was referred to a master "to hear the parties and their evidence and report his findings to the court together with such facts and questions of law as either party may request." Bradley v. Borden, 223 Mass. 575 586. The master heard all the evidence and made a report of his findings and rulings. The plaintiffs excepted to certain findings and rulings; these exceptions were overruled and the master's report was confirmed. The plaintiffs have not appealed from this decree nor from the final decree.
The final decree "ordered, adjudged and decreed: "That the bill be dismissed as to all the plaintiffs, except the Carney Hospital.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
265 Tremont St. v. Hamilburg
... ... matter, according to the contentions of Zinn, and he relies ... upon such cases as Carney Hospital v. McDonald, 227 ... Mass. 231 , Hub Dress Manuf. Co. v. Rottenberg, 237 ... Mass. 281 , ... ...
-
Churchill Downs Dis. Co. v. Churchill Downs, Inc.
...Rouss, Inc. v. Winchester Co. (C.C.A.) 300 F. 706, certiorari denied 266 U.S. 607, 45 S. Ct. 92, 69 L. Ed. 465; Carney Hospital v. McDonald, 227 Mass. 231, 116 N.E. 414. The above cases recognize and apply to the facts therein, the principles for which the distilling company now contends. A......
-
Economy Food Prods. Co. v. Economy Grocery Stores Corp.
...as the plaintiff's cannot be broken into component parts and the use of a part be restrained under this statute. Carney Hospital v. McDonald, 227 Mass. 231, 116 N. E. 414. All that the plaintiff complains of is the use of the word ‘Economy.’ That is not the plaintiff's name. Its name is Eco......
-
Bancroft v. Cook
...D.U. Club, even if there were no other objection to granting such relief. See Weener v. Brayton, 152 Mass. 101 , 106; Carney Hospital v. McDonald, 227 Mass. 231 , 234; Supreme Lodge Knights of Pythias v. Improved Knights of Pythias, 113 Mich. 133, 137. Its other prayers present no sufficien......