Shoe Company v. Wolf Brothers Company, HAMILTON-BROWN

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtPitney
Citation36 S.Ct. 269,60 L.Ed. 629,240 U.S. 251
PartiesSHOE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. WOLF BROTHERS & COMPANY
Docket NumberHAMILTON-BROWN,No. 37
Decision Date21 February 1916
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
246 practice notes
  • Patterson v. Gladwin Corp.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • May 17, 2002
    ...McDaniel, 418 So.2d 934, 935 (Ala.1982); Causey v. State, 374 So.2d 413, 414 (Ala. 1979). See also Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Bros., 240 U.S. 251, 36 S.Ct. 269, 60 L.Ed. 629 (1916). Litigants who rely on opinions of intermediate appellate courts that conflict with opinions of the juris......
  • Virnetx Inc. v. Apple Inc., 2017-1591, 2017-1592, 2017-1593
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
    • August 1, 2019
    ...Theriot , 377 U.S. 152, 153–54, 84 S.Ct. 1157, 12 L.Ed.2d 206 (1964) (per curiam) (quoting Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Bros. & Co. , 240 U.S. 251, 257, 36 S.Ct. 269, 60 L.Ed. 629 (1916) ); see also Major League Baseball Players Ass’n v. Garvey , 532 U.S. 504, 508 n.1, 121 S.Ct. 1724, 14......
  • Murrow v. Clifford, No. 73-1717
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • October 10, 1974
    ...(1973); Indianapolis v. Chase National Bank, 314 U.S. 63, 62 S.Ct. 15, 86 L.Ed. 47 (1941); Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Brothers & Co., 240 U.S. 251, 36 S.Ct. 269, 60 L.Ed. 629 (1916); 9 J. Moore, Federal Practice P110.25(2) (2d ed. 1973); 1B J. Moore, Federal Practice P0.404(10), at 574......
  • LaTouraine Coffee Co. v. Lorraine Coffee Co., No. 300
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • November 12, 1946
    ...is used in an "arbitrary" or fictitious sense, it may be the subject of a valid trade-mark. Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Bros. & Co., 240 U.S. 251, 36 S.Ct. 269, 60 L.Ed. 629 (The American Girl shoe); McIlhenny Co. v. Gaidry, 5 Cir., 253 F. 613 (Tabasco sauce); Century Distilling Co. v. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
238 cases
  • Patterson v. Gladwin Corp.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • May 17, 2002
    ...McDaniel, 418 So.2d 934, 935 (Ala.1982); Causey v. State, 374 So.2d 413, 414 (Ala. 1979). See also Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Bros., 240 U.S. 251, 36 S.Ct. 269, 60 L.Ed. 629 (1916). Litigants who rely on opinions of intermediate appellate courts that conflict with opinions of the juris......
  • Atlantic Monthly Company v. Frederick Ungar Publishing Co.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
    • July 26, 1961
    ...2 Cir., 300 F. 706, certiorari denied 1924, 266 U.S. 607, 45 S.Ct. 92, 69 L.Ed. 465. 14 Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Bros. & Co., 1916, 240 U.S. 251, 36 S.Ct. 269, 60 L.Ed. 629 (The American Girl Shoe); LaTouraine Coffee Co. v. Lorraine Coffee Co., 2 Cir., 157 F.2d 115, 116-117, certiora......
  • Julius Hyman & Co. v. Velsicol Corp., No. 16084
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • May 28, 1951
    ...present situations which make them particularly applicable to the factual situation here: Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Brothers & Co., 240 U.S. 251, 36 S.Ct. 269, 60 L.Ed. 629; Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Manufacturing Company v. S. S. Kresge Co., 316 U.S. 203, 62 S.Ct. 1022, 86 L.Ed. 1381......
  • Horlick's Malted Milk Corporation v. HORLUCK'S, INC, No. 657.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Washington
    • July 11, 1931
    ...213 F. 423; Singer Mfg. Co. v. June, 163 U. S. 169, 200, 16 S. Ct. 1002, 41 L. Ed. 118; Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. v. Wolf Brothers & Co., 240 U. S. 251, 259, 36 S. Ct. 269, 60 L. Ed. 629; Matzger v. Vinikow (C. C. A.) 17 F.(2d) 581, 584; J. F. Rowley Co. v. Rowley (C. C. A.) 193 F. 390, 392; ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT