Glotin v. Oswald

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota

Glotin v. Oswald

65 F. 151, 1894 U.S. App. LEXIS 3121

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota

DecidedDecember 12, 1894

StatusPublished

This text of 65 F. 151 (Glotin v. Oswald) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Glotin v. Oswald, 65 F. 151, 1894 U.S. App. LEXIS 3121 (circtdmn 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

NELSOX, District Judge.

The complaint shows that these complainants, residents and citizens of the republic of France, are making a liqueur called “Creme de Menthe” in France, and exporting it to this country; and having filed their trade-mark here, and complied with the law in that respect, they are entitled to protection. The statute of 1881, which gives them the right to commence a suit without alleging ihe amount in controversy, was not repealed by the statutes of 1887 and 1888, which make it necessary, in order to give jurisdiction t,o the United States circuit court, that the amount involved be §2,000. The demurrer is overruled, and the motion for a temporary injunction granted, and defendants will be given until next rule day to file their answer.

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

NELSOX, District Judge.

The complaint shows that these complainants, residents and citizens of the republic of France, are making a liqueur called “Creme de Menthe” in France, and exporting it to this country; and having filed their trade-mark here, and complied with the law in that respect, they are entitled to protection. The statute of 1881, which gives them the right to commence a suit without alleging ihe amount in controversy, was not repealed by the statutes of 1887 and 1888, which make it necessary, in order to give jurisdiction t,o the United States circuit court, that the amount involved be §2,000. The demurrer is overruled, and the motion for a temporary injunction granted, and defendants will be given until next rule day to file their answer.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 F. 151, 1894 U.S. App. LEXIS 3121, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glotin-v-oswald-circtdmn-1894.