A. Bourjois & Co. v. Aldridge

263 U.S. 675, 44 S. Ct. 4, 68 L. Ed. 501, 1923 U.S. LEXIS 2840
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided October 8, 1923·No. No. 50·Published·Cited by 21 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The two.quéstions certified by the Circuit Court of Appeals’“for Second Circuit are answered in the affirmative, upon the authority of Bourjois & Co. v. Katzel, 260 U. S. 689, the defendant not objecting.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

A. Bourjois & Co. v. Aldridge, 263 U.S. 675, 44 S. Ct. 4, 68 L. Ed. 501, 1923 U.S. LEXIS 2840 (1923).

263 U.S. 675 (A. Bourjois & Co. v. Aldridge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Montblanc-Simplo GMBH v. Staples, Inc.
172 F. Supp. 2d 231 (D. Massachusetts, 2001)
Lever Brothers Company v. United States of America
981 F.2d 1330 (D.C. Circuit, 1993)
Weil Ceramics And Glass, Inc. v. Bernard Dash
878 F.2d 659 (Third Circuit, 1989)
Lever Brothers Co. v. United States of America
877 F.2d 101 (D.C. Circuit, 1989)
Weil Ceramics & Glass, Inc. v. Dash
878 F.2d 659 (Third Circuit, 1989)
Lever Bros. Co. v. United States
652 F. Supp. 403 (District of Columbia, 1987)
United States v. Eighty-Nine Bottles of Eau De Joy
797 F.2d 767 (Ninth Circuit, 1986)
Weil Ceramics & Glass, Inc. v. Dash
618 F. Supp. 700 (D. New Jersey, 1985)
Olympus Corp. v. United States
627 F. Supp. 911 (E.D. New York, 1985)
Vivitar Corp. v. United States
593 F. Supp. 420 (Court of International Trade, 1984)
Bell & Howell : Mamiya Co. v. Masel Supply Co.
548 F. Supp. 1063 (E.D. New York, 1982)