Schwegmann Bros. GS Mkts. v. Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc.
| Decision Date | 22 April 1955 |
| Docket Number | No. 15350.,15350. |
| Citation | 221 F.2d 326 |
| Parties | SCHWEGMANN BROTHERS GIANT SUPER MARKETS et al., Appellants, v. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE, Inc., Appellee. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE, Inc., Appellant, v. SCHWEGMANN BROTHERS GIANT SUPER MARKETS et al., Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Saul Stone, New Orleans, La., Paul O. H. Pigman, Wisdom & Stone, John Minor Wisdom, New Orleans, La., for appellants.
Joseph H. Stamler, Newark, N. J., Murray F. Cleveland, New Orleans, La., Maurice W. Levy, Nutley, N. J., Melvin P. Antell, Newark, N. J., on the brief, for appellee.
Before HUTCHESON, Chief Judge, HOLMES, Circuit Judge, and DAWKINS, District Judge.
This appeal is here in a double aspect, first, on an appeal from an order denying the petition of Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc., to punish the Schwegmann Brothers for contempt; and, second, on an appeal by Schwegmann Brothers from an order dated June 23, 1954, amending a prior injunction entered by the court against them. This is a slightly different phase of the controversy that has been existing between Schwegmann Brothers and the Fair Trade Laws. This case comes up in a way about to be stated, and, since both sides have appealed, Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc., will be referred to as the plaintiff and Schwegmann Brothers Giant Super Markets, et al., will be referred to as the defendants.
In a suit brought by the plaintiff to prevent the defendants from selling the plaintiff's drug products at less than fixed prices, a judgment was rendered for the plaintiff which permanently restrained the defendants from in any manner or by any means, directly or indirectly, advertising for sale, or selling, any of certain named commodities manufactured by and bearing the trade-mark, brand, or name of plaintiff, at prices less than those stipulated in contracts entered into by plaintiff with other retailers pursuant to the Louisiana Fair Trade Law, LSA-R.S. 51:391 et seq. or at prices less than those that might be shown in any future minimum-retail-price schedules issued by plaintiff in connection with such contracts.
Jurisdiction of this cause was retained for the purpose of giving full effect to said judgment and for the purpose of making such further orders and decrees, or taking such further action, if any, as might become necessary or appropriate to carry out and enforce said judgment.
After a fair hearing on the petition to punish the defendants for contempt, the court below denied the petition and amended its former judgment so as to state the permissible minimum prices therein. D.C., 122 F.Supp. 781. We find no reversible error in the rulings of the trial court because, among other reasons, the customer's awareness of the name of the drug in his prescription is not an essential factor in determining whether the trade name or good will of the manufacturer is used if the prescription designates the drug by the manufacturer's name or trade-mark. The amendment of the decree of injunction was proper, under Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., because an injunction must describe specifically and in reasonable detail, not by reference to the complaint or some other document, the act or acts sought to be restrained. Nasif v. United States, 5 Cir., 165 F.2d 119.
What we are doing may be contrary to the sense of justice of the writer, who retains the views...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dr. G. H. Tichenor Antiseptic Co. v. Schwegmann Bros. Giant Super Markets
...346 U.S. 856, 74 S.Ct. 71, 98 L.Ed. 369, rehearing denied 346 U.S. 905, 74 S.Ct. 217, 98 L.Ed. 404; Schwegmann Bros. Giant Super Markets v. Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc., 5 Cir., 221 F.2d 326, certiorari denied 350 U.S. 839, 76 S.Ct. 77, 100 L.Ed. [231 La. 56] --- and old DearBorn distRibuting co......
-
Dave's Market, Inc. v. Department of Alcoholic BeverageControl of Cal.
...98 L.Ed. 394]) and since 1952 has consistently refused to grant hearings in similar matters (Schwegmann Brothers Giant Super Markets, et al. v. HoffmannLa Roche, Inc. (5 Cir. 1955) 221 F.2d 326, cert. den. 350 U.S. 839, 76 S.Ct. 77, 100 L.Ed. 748; Schwegmann Brothers Giant Super Markets, et......
-
Save-Mor Drugs, Bethesda, Inc. v. Upjohn Co.
...order was erroneous in being made applicable to any such products or to the particular products here involved. Schwegmann Bros v. Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc., 5 Cir., 221 F.2d 326, certiorari denied 350 U.S. 839, 76 S.Ct. 77, 100 L.Ed. 748, squarely holds that under the Louisiana statute, which......
-
Dr. G. H. Tichenor Antiseptic Co. v. Schwegmann Bros. Giant Super Markets
...81 L.Ed. 109, are decisive of the issues which are involved here. To those there may now be added Schwegmann Brothers Giant Super Markets v. Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc., 5 Cir., 221 F.2d 326, in which the Supreme Court of the United States denied writs of certiorari. 76 S.Ct. Counsel for respond......