Devlin v. . Devlin

69 N.Y. 212, 1877 N.Y. LEXIS 824
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 3, 1877
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 69 N.Y. 212 (Devlin v. . Devlin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Devlin v. . Devlin, 69 N.Y. 212, 1877 N.Y. LEXIS 824 (N.Y. 1877).

Opinion

Church, Ch. J.

Both the Special and General Terms have decided that the words and letters on the altered sign are so arranged as to deceive the public, and were so intended. The initial letters “ J. S.” being placed over the word Devlin, and flanked by the No. of the store of defendant, it is said violates the injunction not to use the defendant’s Christian and surname, in a manner calculated to deceive, and requiring that they must be conjoined. The facts will *215 justify this inference and in such a case the general rule is fur this court to adopt the conclusions of the court below. The initials are not strictly conjoined to the surname, and it is probable that “ Devlin’s clothing” is still the distinguishing feature of the sign which the defendant was forbidden to use, and that from the situation of the initials between the figures on the top of the sign they would not or might not be understood to have been intended as a part of the name. The defendant may have intended to comply with the injunction, but the courts below think that he has failed to do so, and within the rule adverted to we feel constrained to follow their finding of fact, but as we concur with the learned judge, who delivered the opinion at General Term, that the decision “ sails very close to the wind,” we are inclined to affirm the order without costs to either party as against the other in this court.

All concur except Earl, J., dissenting.

Order affirmed.

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

Related

John B. Stetson Co. v. Stephen L. Stetson Co.
128 F.2d 981 (Second Circuit, 1942)
Hugo Stein Cloak Co. v. S. B. Stein & Son, Inc.
16 N.E.2d 609 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1937)
Walters v. Reinhoudt
130 Misc. 745 (New York Supreme Court, 1927)
Lerner Stores Corp. v. Lerner Ladies Apparel Shop, Inc.
218 A.D. 427 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1926)
Danziger v. Gottlieb
156 A.D. 779 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1913)
Stephen Merritt Burial & Cremation Co. v. Stephen Merritt Co.
155 A.D. 565 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1913)
World's Dispensary Medical Ass'n v. Pierce
96 N.E. 738 (New York Court of Appeals, 1911)
Kaufman v. Kaufman
123 N.Y.S. 699 (New York Supreme Court, 1910)
Hildreth v. McCaul
70 A.D. 162 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1902)
Church v. Kresner
26 A.D. 349 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1898)
Priestley v. Adams
13 N.Y.S. 41 (New York Supreme Court, 1891)
Scott Stamp & Coin Co. v. J. W. Scott Co.
15 N.Y.S. 325 (Superior Court of New York, 1890)
Scott Stamp & Coin Co. v. J. W. Scott Co.
26 Jones & S. 379 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1890)
Caswell v. . Hazard
24 N.E. 707 (New York Court of Appeals, 1890)
Bronk v. Riley
2 N.Y.S. 266 (New York Supreme Court, 1888)
N. Y. Cab Co. v. Mooney
15 Abb. N. Cas. 152 (New York Supreme Court, 1884)
New York, Lake Erie & Western Railway Co. v. Board of Supervisors
67 How. Pr. 5 (New York Supreme Court, 1882)
Smith v. Cooper
5 Abb. N. Cas. 274 (New York City Court, 1877)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
69 N.Y. 212, 1877 N.Y. LEXIS 824, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/devlin-v-devlin-ny-1877.