Lichtenstein v. Goldsmith

• Decision Date: 23 January 1889
• Citation: 37 F. 359
• Parties: LICHTENSTEIN et al. v. GOLDSMITH.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts

37 F. 359

LICHTENSTEIN et al. v. GOLDSMITH.

United States Circuit Court, D. Massachusetts.

January 23, 1889

George L. Huntress, for complainants.

Edward H. Pierce, for defendant.

COLT J.

The complainants are the owners of a trade-mark consisting of the head of an elk, with the word 'Elk' printed in large letters upon the face of the label, and this mark has been used by them for a number of years upon boxes of cigars.The defendant brands certain boxes of cigars made by him with substantially the same device.In view of the close identity of the two devices, the defendant cannot deny infringement but he places his defense on other grounds.I will consider those which are most important.

It is said that the trade-mark is invalid because it does not designate origin or ownership.This is manifestly unsound.The original design contained the letters 'A. L. &amp Bro.,' standing for A. Lichtenstein & Brother, and, as now used, it has the words printed on it, 'Patented by the Elk Cigar Factory, June 15, 1875. ' There is also stamped upon the box the district in New York in which the factory is located.Since 1875 these cigars of the Elk brands have been made by A. Lichtenstein & Bro., or their successors, A. Lichtenstein, Son & Co., and their factory has been known as the 'Elk Cigar Factory.'It seems to me that the trade-mark sufficiently indicates origin and ownership.

Again it is said that the complainants deceive the public, in that they allow the boxes to be labeled with the names of dealers to whom the...