Maizels v. Kozer

276 P. 277, 129 Or. 100, 1929 Ore. LEXIS 110
CourtOregon Supreme Court
DecidedApril 3, 1929
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 276 P. 277 (Maizels v. Kozer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

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

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

Related

Kleikamp v. Board of Commissioners of Yamhill County
455 P.3d 546 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2019)
A & X, Inc. v. Common Council of Eugene
597 P.2d 851 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1979)
Northwest Environmental Defense Center v. City Council of Portland
531 P.2d 284 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
276 P. 277, 129 Or. 100, 1929 Ore. LEXIS 110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maizels-v-kozer-or-1929.