Sutton Imports, Inc. v. Statler Gift Shops, Inc.

New York Supreme Court

Sutton Imports, Inc. v. Statler Gift Shops, Inc.

13 Misc. 2d 761, 178 N.Y.S.2d 787, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3305

DecidedMay 20, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 13 Misc. 2d 761 (Sutton Imports, Inc. v. Statler Gift Shops, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sutton Imports, Inc. v. Statler Gift Shops, Inc., 13 Misc. 2d 761, 178 N.Y.S.2d 787, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3305 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

Owen McGivern, J.

Upon the foregoing papers this motion to punish for contempt for failure to obey an order of this court, which enjoined the use of the word “ Statler ” in respondent’s business, and which ordered removal of the name “ Statler ” or any simulation thereof from its business establishment, is denied. While the attempted obliteration was not wholly effective, the court, in view of the effort and the fact that there is now a complete obliteration of the name, does not believe that there was a willful and contumacious violation requiring punishment. In addition, it is the opinion of the court, that the word “ Starlet ” in script on the respondent’s establishment is not a simulation of the name “ Statler ” referred to in the prior order of this court.

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

Owen McGivern, J.

Upon the foregoing papers this motion to punish for contempt for failure to obey an order of this court, which enjoined the use of the word “ Statler ” in respondent’s business, and which ordered removal of the name “ Statler ” or any simulation thereof from its business establishment, is denied. While the attempted obliteration was not wholly effective, the court, in view of the effort and the fact that there is now a complete obliteration of the name, does not believe that there was a willful and contumacious violation requiring punishment. In addition, it is the opinion of the court, that the word “ Starlet ” in script on the respondent’s establishment is not a simulation of the name “ Statler ” referred to in the prior order of this court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 Misc. 2d 761, 178 N.Y.S.2d 787, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3305, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sutton-imports-inc-v-statler-gift-shops-inc-nysupct-1958.