Palicio Compania v. Brush
This text of 375 F.2d 1011 (Palicio Compania v. Brush) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
375 F.2d 1011
154 U.S.P.Q. 75
F. PALICIO Y COMPANIA, S.A., Cifuentes Y compania, Por
Larranaga, S.A., Menendez, Garcia Y compania,
Limitada, and Tabacalera Jose L. Piedra,
S.A., Plaintiffs-Appellants-Appellees,
v.
Gilbert P. BRUSH and Monroe Percy Bloch, co-partners, doing
business under the firm name and style of Brush &
Bloch, Defendants-Appellants-Appellees.
No. 415, Docket 30984.
United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.
Argued April 17, 1967.
Decided April 26, 1967.
Leonard B. Boudin, New York City (Rabinowitz & Boudin, New Victor Rabinowitz, New York City, on the brief), for plaintiffs-appellants-appellees.
Jac M. Wolff, New York City (Brush & Bloch, New York City, Monroe Percy Bloch, New York City, on the brief), for defendants-appellants-appellees.
Before MOORE, KAUFMAN and FEINBERG, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Having considered the various points raised by plaintiffs-appellants-appellees and defendants-appellants-appellees, we are of the opinion that Judge Bryan's discussion of the facts and his analysis and application of the law are correct; we therefore affirm on the basis of his well reasoned opinion reported at 256 F.Supp. 481 (S.D.N.Y.1966).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
375 F.2d 1011, 154 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 75, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 6609, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palicio-compania-v-brush-ca2-1967.