Collins Chemical & Manuf'g Co. v. Capitol City Manuf'g Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut

Collins Chemical & Manuf'g Co. v. Capitol City Manuf'g Co.

42 F. 64, 1890 U.S. App. LEXIS 2112

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut·Decided May 1, 1890·Published

Opinion

Shipman, J.

The complainants’ bill for an alleged infringement of their trade-marlc makes profert of the trade-mark, and of the alleged infringement, and exhibits of the boxes and the devices, and symbols thereon, which are used by each party accompany the bill. The defendant has demurred, upon -the ground that the plaintiffs’ bill shows that they have no case. Upon the hearing of the demurrer the complainants did not appear. An inspection of the boxes shows palpably that there is no infringement. The demurrer is sustained.

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

Shipman, J.

The complainants’ bill for an alleged infringement of their trade-marlc makes profert of the trade-mark, and of the alleged infringement, and exhibits of the boxes and the devices, and symbols thereon, which are used by each party accompany the bill. The defendant has demurred, upon -the ground that the plaintiffs’ bill shows that they have no case. Upon the hearing of the demurrer the complainants did not appear. An inspection of the boxes shows palpably that there is no infringement. The demurrer is sustained.

Collins Chemical & Manuf'g Co. v. Capitol City Manuf'g Co., 42 F. 64, 1890 U.S. App. LEXIS 2112 (circtdct 1890).

Pincite

42 F. 64 (Collins Chemical & Manuf'g Co. v. Capitol City Manuf'g Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.