S. Wicha, Inc. v. Formal Dresses, Inc.

32 F. Supp. 731, 44 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 669, 1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3186
CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedFebruary 26, 1940
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 32 F. Supp. 731 (S. Wicha, Inc. v. Formal Dresses, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
S. Wicha, Inc. v. Formal Dresses, Inc., 32 F. Supp. 731, 44 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 669, 1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3186 (S.D.N.Y. 1940).

Opinion

MANDELBAUM, District Judge.

From the testimony and exhibits in this case I am not impressed that the plaintiff is the first inventor of the patented design which the plaintiff claims the defendant Harmony Dresses infringes.

I find from the evidence that similar dresses to the plaintiff’s style were manufactured and sold before the plaintiff’s alleged discovery, and that the style and design involved was and is in common use in the dress trade, long before the plaintiff’s alleged discovery.

In no way does the plaintiff meet the test of novelty and invention. The “Jezabel” dress design, almost identical, is one of the answers to the plaintiff’s contention.

I therefore find no evidence of infringement.

Bill dismissed.

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

Related

Westmoreland Asbestos Co. v. Johns-Manville Corp.
113 F.2d 114 (Second Circuit, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
32 F. Supp. 731, 44 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 669, 1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3186, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/s-wicha-inc-v-formal-dresses-inc-nysd-1940.