Bard-Parker Co. v. Crescent Surgical Sales Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bard-Parker Co. v. Crescent Surgical Sales Co.

247 A.D. 716

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 15, 1936·Published

Opinion

Order, so far as appealed from, granting plaintiff’s motion for an injunction pendente lite, affirmed, with [717]*717ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present — MeAvoy, Townley, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.; Untermyer, J., dissents in part: The order should be modified so as to permit the appellants truthfully to state their previous connection with the surgical blades heretofore sold by the plaintiff, and also to permit the appellants truthfully to state that the blades now sold by them are identical, except as to the source of origin of manufacture, with the blades now manufactured by the plaintiff. In other words, the order should be modified to permit the appellants to advertise the truth.

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

Order, so far as appealed from, granting plaintiff’s motion for an injunction pendente lite, affirmed, with [717]*717ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present — MeAvoy, Townley, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.; Untermyer, J., dissents in part: The order should be modified so as to permit the appellants truthfully to state their previous connection with the surgical blades heretofore sold by the plaintiff, and also to permit the appellants truthfully to state that the blades now sold by them are identical, except as to the source of origin of manufacture, with the blades now manufactured by the plaintiff. In other words, the order should be modified to permit the appellants to advertise the truth.

Bard-Parker Co. v. Crescent Surgical Sales Co., 247 A.D. 716 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

247 A.D. 716 (Bard-Parker Co. v. Crescent Surgical Sales Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.