Cohen v. Delavina
| Decision Date | 12 November 1900 |
| Docket Number | 534. |
| Citation | 104 F. 946 |
| Parties | COHEN v. DELAVINA. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Maine |
Edward M. Rand, for complainant.
Bird & Bradley, for respondent.
This case comes before the court on a motion for an ad interim injunction. On the affidavits of the complainant he clearly is entitled to the injunction asked for. The case does not come within Hatch Storage-Battery Co. v. Electric Storage-Battery Co., 41 C.C.A. 133, 100 F. 975, 976 (decided by the court of appeals for this circuit on March 16, 1900), because the rules there stated do not apply where the effect of the injunction would be only to hold matters statu quo, or substantially so, or where its refusal would seriously and irretrievably impair the business of the complainant, and the granting of it would cause only a temporary minor loss to the respondent. The case comes back to the general rules applicable to granting injunctions under such circumstances that the court is compelled to balance the relative detriments to the parties before it.
The difficulty the court has to deal with, however, is that there is on nearly every point in the case a very serious conflict of fact, as shown by the respondent's affidavits; a conflict which, on final hearing, may require an investigation of a very large amount of testimony, extending over a long period of time and through an extensive range of localities. The objections to disposing of motions for preliminary injunctions under such circumstances, except according to formal rules, are very serious; because, if the court undertakes to investigate the testimony pro and con, it gets a twist which is very detrimental on final hearing. Therefore the court must find some way of disposing of this matter without undertaking to pass on the conflicting proofs before it.
The court, however, is clear that the use by the respondent of the red color on the outside of the box and the inside of the lid violates the rules of the law with reference to unfair trade. This red color is very peculiar, and is the particular thing which a customer would carry in his mind. One who has purchased and cigar manufactured by the complainant, seeing this red, would naturally be so struck by it that he would carry that without carrying in his mind anything else. The other differences between the two packages would not ordinarily impress his mind as would the red color. The red used by the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Weaver v. Richardson
... ... purpose of preserving the condition of the title and ... occupancy pending litigation. (22 Cyc. 821; Cohen v ... Delavina, 104 F. 946; Newton v. Levis, 79 F ... 715; R. R. Co. v. U. S. 124 F. 156; Ry. Co. v ... Carolina C. & I. Co., 151 F ... ...
-
Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Jackson
...v. Cox (D. C.) 257 F. 334; Southern Pacific Co. v. Earl (C. C. A.) 82 F. 690. 3 Allison v. Corson et al. (C. C. A.) 88 F. 581; Cohen v. Delavina (C. C.) 104 F. 946; Colorado Eastern R. Co. v. C., B. & Q. Ry. Co. (C. C. A.) 141 F. 898; Carpenter et al. v. Knollwood Cemetery et al. (C. C.) 18......
-
Ohio Baking Co. v. National Biscuit Co.
...77 F. 869, 23 C.C.A. 554; Hires Co. Consumers' Co., 100 F. 809, 41 C.C.A. 71; Morgan Co. v. Whittier Co. (C.C.) 118 F. 657; Cohen v. Delavina (C.C.) 104 F. 946. We satisfied that the 'factory Seal' trade-mark, when printed on the vivid red background and applied to the ends of a cracker or ......