Oleg Cassini, Inc. v. Dorene Fashions Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Oleg Cassini, Inc. v. Dorene Fashions Corp.

3 A.D.2d 706, 159 N.Y.S.2d 664, 117 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 307, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6368

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 26, 1957·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

The injunctive relief granted at Special Term was predicated entirely on the letter of December 2, 1954, written by the appellants’ predecessors. This letter was delivered as an incident to the settlement of a suit that concerned an infringement by the appellants’ predecessors of a design patent held by the respondent on one of its original models. The letter, which, parenthetically, was not made part of the stipulation of settlement, stated, “You have our assurance that at no time will we infringe or copy any of your designs.” Under the circumstances so all-embracing an agreement is unenforeible. .Since Special Term indicated in its opinion that there was no proof to sustain the allegations of unfair competition, the judgment is unanimously reversed, with costs to the appellants, and the complaint dismissed. Settle order on notice. Concur — Botein, J. P., Rabin, Frank, Valente and McNally, JJ.

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

The injunctive relief granted at Special Term was predicated entirely on the letter of December 2, 1954, written by the appellants’ predecessors. This letter was delivered as an incident to the settlement of a suit that concerned an infringement by the appellants’ predecessors of a design patent held by the respondent on one of its original models. The letter, which, parenthetically, was not made part of the stipulation of settlement, stated, “You have our assurance that at no time will we infringe or copy any of your designs.” Under the circumstances so all-embracing an agreement is unenforeible. .Since Special Term indicated in its opinion that there was no proof to sustain the allegations of unfair competition, the judgment is unanimously reversed, with costs to the appellants, and the complaint dismissed. Settle order on notice. Concur — Botein, J. P., Rabin, Frank, Valente and McNally, JJ.

Oleg Cassini, Inc. v. Dorene Fashions Corp., 3 A.D.2d 706, 159 N.Y.S.2d 664, 117 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 307, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6368 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

3 A.D.2d 706 (Oleg Cassini, Inc. v. Dorene Fashions Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related