The Insect-O-Lite Company, Inc. v. William C. Hagemeyer, James C. Noyes, Meredith J. Beirne, Hagemeyer Chemical Co., Inc.

226 F.2d 580, 107 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 100, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 3097
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedOctober 14, 1955
Docket12589
StatusPublished

This text of 226 F.2d 580 (The Insect-O-Lite Company, Inc. v. William C. Hagemeyer, James C. Noyes, Meredith J. Beirne, Hagemeyer Chemical Co., Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
The Insect-O-Lite Company, Inc. v. William C. Hagemeyer, James C. Noyes, Meredith J. Beirne, Hagemeyer Chemical Co., Inc., 226 F.2d 580, 107 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 100, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 3097 (6th Cir. 1955).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction in appellant’s action for trade mark infringement and unfair competition. The motion for an injunction pendente lite was addressed to the sound discretion of the district court, and appellant is not entitled to reversal except upon a clear showing that this discretion was not exercised with due regard for applicable principles of equity. Huber Baking Co. v. Stroehmann Bros. Co., 2 Cir., 1953, 208 F.2d 464; Pierce v. Aeronautical Communications Equipment, Inc., 5 Cir., 1955, 223 F.2d 410. Appellant has made no such showing.

While there was evidence which if believed might have justified a conclusion of unfair competition causing irreparable injury, this evidence was unsupported except by affidavits which the court correctly excluded as hearsay. Moreover, this evidence was directly controverted by the appellees, and its credibility was for the district court.

It appears that substantial questions may be involved in the trial of this case on the merits, but the district court, balancing the equities, did not abuse its discretion in concluding that appellant will suffer no irreparable damage in the meantime.

The order of the district court is affirmed.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
226 F.2d 580, 107 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 100, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 3097, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-insect-o-lite-company-inc-v-william-c-hagemeyer-james-c-noyes-ca6-1955.