De Kuyper v. Witteman
| Citation | 23 F. 871 |
| Parties | DE KUYPER and others v. WITTEMAN and others. |
| Decision Date | 12 January 1885 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Rowland Cox, for plaintiff.
B. B. Foster, for defendant.
The demurrer in this case is without merits. The complainants, upon the facts shown in the bill of complaint, have a good title to their trade-mark, and a case for its protection irrespective of their statutory rights under the registration in the patent-office. As the necessary diversity of citizenship exists between the parties, they are entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this court.
Upon the allegations of the bill the defendants are actively engaged in assisting third persons to use the complainants' trade-mark in violation of their rights. The mere act of printing and selling labels in imitation of the complainants' might be innocent, and, without evidence of an illicit purpose, would not be a violation of the complainants' rights. It is otherwise, however, when this is done with the obvious purpose of enabling others by the use of the labels to palm off their goods upon the public as the goods of the complainants.
The demurrer is overruled, with costs. Defendants may answer upon payment of costs.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Horlick's Malted Milk Corporation v. HORLUCK'S, INC
...U. S. 90, 39 S. Ct. 48, 63 L. Ed. 141; New York Grape Sugar Co. v. Buffalo Grape Sugar Co. (C. C.) 18 F. 638 at page 646; De Kuyper v. Witteman (C. C.) 23 F. 871; Keller v. Stolzenbach (C. C.) 28 F. 81, 82; Covert v. Travers Bros. Co. (C. C.) 96 F. 568, 569; Weber Medical Tea Co. v. Weber e......
-
Electric Vacuum Cleaner Co. v. Green
...285 F. 501; Champion Spark Plug Co. v. Emener, D.C., 16 F.Supp. 816; Champion Spark Plug Co. v. Reich, D.C., 24 F.Supp. 945; De Kuyper v. Witteman, C.C., 23 F. 871; Hennessy v. Herrmann et al., C.C., 89 F. The right of the owner of a patented machine to repair it and the right to sell it ar......
-
Hennessy v. Herrmann
...... . . That. the acts of respondents, as alleged, constitute an invasion. of complainants' rights, is well settled. In De. Kuyper v. Witteman, 23 F. 871, the court said:. . . . 'The. complainants, upon the facts shown in the bill of. complaint, have a good title ......
-
Harper v. Shoppell
...purchaser who printed and published it, and is responsible with him as a joint tort-feasor. Wallace v. Holmes, 9 Blatchf. 65; De Kuyper v. Witteman, 23 F. 871; Travers Beyer, 26 F. 450. Judgment is ordered for plaintiff. ...