Highway Cruisers of Cal., Inc. v. Security Industries, Inc.
| Decision Date | 01 March 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 20022.,20022. |
| Citation | 374 F.2d 875 |
| Parties | HIGHWAY CRUISERS OF CALIFORNIA, INC., a California corporation, Appellant, v. SECURITY INDUSTRIES, INC., an Idaho corporation, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
W. Anthony Park, Dwight F. Bickel, Graydon W. Smith, Boise, Idaho, for appellant.
Karl Jeppesen, of Elam, Burke, Jeppesen & Evans, Boise, Idaho, for appellee.
Before CHAMBERS, MERRILL and DUNIWAY, Circuit Judges.
Many manufacturers of automobile trailers make what is called a camper. The appellant and appellee build them too.1 The camper is a compact temporary living unit which sits in the bed of a pickup truck. Particularly hunters and fishermen like to use them. When detached from the pickup truck, they have little use except perhaps as children's playhouses. We have had these campers here on the question of applicability of federal excise taxes. United States v. King Trailer Company, Inc., 9 Cir., 350 F.2d 947.
Highway Cruisers of California, Inc., markets its campers under the registered federal trademark of "Sports Cab." Its label for most of the time at issue has read:
SPORTS CAB
Highway Cruisers (appellant) began in April, 1957, to sell its camper or demountable house trailer cabin under the foregoing label. A year and a half later, Security Industries (appellee) turned up with a camper in the market that looked like Highway's and carried the label:
SPORTS CAB TRAVELER
In 1962, three years after the infringing began, Highway Cruisers sued Security Industries to stop the alleged infringement on name and for an accounting. After a trial, the district court in Idaho found infringement of the trademark, entered an injunction and awarded damages of one dollar. The award of one dollar was based on findings by the court that "the evidence fails to disclose that plaintiff suffered any damages as a result of the infringement by defendant and the court finds that no damages to plaintiff resulted therefrom." Further, the court found: "Under the circumstances shown by the evidence, the plaintiff's loss of business, if any, would not be fairly measured by defendant's profits nor be revealed by an accounting." Highway Cruisers appeals from the failure of the trial court to order an accounting.
The trial court found the infringement deliberate but not willful. By that we think it meant that Security knew what it was doing but it erroneously believed it had a legal right to use two words, "Sport Cab," just as much as Highway Cruisers. Security regarded the words as generic as "automobile."2
Many, many words are used by both sides on the issue of an accounting or no accounting. But we sum the thing up this way. In the testimony about damage, the court saw enough of Highway Cruisers damage to see that an accounting would amount to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bandag, Inc. v. Al Bolser's Tire Stores, Inc.
...that the actions complained of did in fact cause actual damage to the plaintiff. Highway Cruisers of California, Inc. v. Security Industries, Inc., 374 F.2d 875, 876, 153 USPQ 94, 95 (9th Cir.1967). The goal of section 1117 is to achieve equity between or among parties. As stated by the Nin......
-
Pebble Beach Co. v. Tour 18 I Ltd.
...case. See Champion Spark Plug, 331 U.S. at 131, 67 S.Ct. 1136; Bandag, 750 F.2d at 917; see also Highway Cruisers of Cal., Inc. v. Security Indus., Inc., 374 F.2d 875, 876 (9th Cir.1967) ("One may get just enough relief to stop the evil where it is apparent no great damage was done to the c......
-
Red Devil Tools v. Tip Top Brush Co.
...products, injunctive relief alone has been found to be equitably sufficient. See, e.g., Highway Cruisers of Cal., Inc. v. Security Industries, Inc., 374 F.2d 875 (9 Cir. 1967); Morgenstern Chemical Co. v. G. D. Searle & Co., supra, 253 F.2d 390, cert. denied, 358 U.S. 816, 79 S.Ct. 25, 3 L.......
-
Wells Fargo & Co. v. Wells Fargo Express Co.
...as to the source of, and therefore infringed, a product with a registered trade-mark. See e. g., Highway Cruisers of Cal., Inc. v. Security Industries, Inc., 374 F.2d 875 (9th Cir. 1967). In such a case an injunction fully satisfies both the policy of the Act and the equities of the case. C......
-
Table of Cases
...791, 793 Highmark, Inc. v. UPMC Health Plan, 276 F.3d 160 (3d Cir. 2001), 1263, 1281, 1282 Highway Cruisers of Cal. v. Sec. Indus., Inc., 374 F.2d 875 (9th Cir. 1967), 1314 Hill v. Hoover Co., 899 F. Supp. 2d 1259 (N.D. Fla. 2012), 811 Hill’s Pet Nutrition, Inc. v. Nutro Prods., 258 F. Supp......
-
Private Remedies for False or Misleading Advertising: Lanham Act Section 43(a)
...seeks to confuse the public by implying that it is associated with the senior user); Highway Cruisers of Cal. v. Sec. Indus., Inc., 374 F.2d 875, 875 (9th Cir. 1967) (affirming lower court’s refusal to award defendant’s profits based on finding that defendant’s infringement was “deliberate”......