Home Decorators, Inc. v. Herfort

Fifth Circuit

Home Decorators, Inc. v. Herfort

179 F.2d 398

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 30, 1950

Docket13034_1

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 179 F.2d 398 (Home Decorators, Inc. v. Herfort) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Home Decorators, Inc. v. Herfort, 179 F.2d 398 (5th Cir. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order denying a preliminary injunction in a suit brought by the Home Decorators, Inc., a New York corporation, to restrain John Her-fort, owner of a jewelry store in Rosenberg, Texas, from making any statement or giving his opinion of the relative value, merits, or wearing qualities, of silver-plated ware sold by appellant. The district court, having ordered the hearing to be on written affidavits, held that the case, as presented, did not justify the issuance of a preliminary injunction, and in so doing we think there was no abuse of discretion. Therefore, the order appealed from is affirmed. Ex parte Tucker, 110 Tex. 335, 220 S.W. 75; Gibralter Savings & Building Ass’n et al. v. Isbell et al., Tex.Civ.App., 101 S.W.2d 1029.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order denying a preliminary injunction in a suit brought by the Home Decorators, Inc., a New York corporation, to restrain John Her-fort, owner of a jewelry store in Rosenberg, Texas, from making any statement or giving his opinion of the relative value, merits, or wearing qualities, of silver-plated ware sold by appellant. The district court, having ordered the hearing to be on written affidavits, held that the case, as presented, did not justify the issuance of a preliminary injunction, and in so doing we think there was no abuse of discretion. Therefore, the order appealed from is affirmed. Ex parte Tucker, 110 Tex. 335, 220 S.W. 75; Gibralter Savings & Building Ass’n et al. v. Isbell et al., Tex.Civ.App., 101 S.W.2d 1029.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

179 F.2d 398, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/home-decorators-inc-v-herfort-ca5-1950.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack