Maizels v. Kozer

Oregon Supreme Court

Maizels v. Kozer

276 P. 277, 129 Or. 100, 1929 Ore. LEXIS 110

Oregon Supreme Court·Decided April 3, 1929·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

PEE OUEIAM.

This case arose in a controversy between two merchants over a trademark. The Hon. Sam A. Kozer, then Secretary of State, directed a cancellation of plaintiff’s trademark because, in his opinion, it was an infringement of a trademark to which A. Yolchok, the other merchant, was entitled. Plaintiff sued out a writ of review. The writ was not served on the opposing party to the proceeding before the Secretary of State, to wit: A. Yolchok. For this reason the Circuit Court was without juris *101 diction to entertain the case: Or. L., § 609; Williams v. Henry, 70 Or. 466, 468 (142 Pac. 337).

The judgment of the Circuit Court is reversed and proceedings dismissed. Reversed and Dismissed.

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

PEE OUEIAM.

This case arose in a controversy between two merchants over a trademark. The Hon. Sam A. Kozer, then Secretary of State, directed a cancellation of plaintiff’s trademark because, in his opinion, it was an infringement of a trademark to which A. Yolchok, the other merchant, was entitled. Plaintiff sued out a writ of review. The writ was not served on the opposing party to the proceeding before the Secretary of State, to wit: A. Yolchok. For this reason the Circuit Court was without juris *101 diction to entertain the case: Or. L., § 609; Williams v. Henry, 70 Or. 466, 468 (142 Pac. 337).

The judgment of the Circuit Court is reversed and proceedings dismissed. Reversed and Dismissed.

Maizels v. Kozer, 276 P. 277, 129 Or. 100, 1929 Ore. LEXIS 110 (Or. 1929).

Pincite

276 P. 277 (Maizels v. Kozer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related