Vidal Jeans, Inc. v. Bonjour Paris Fashions, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vidal Jeans, Inc. v. Bonjour Paris Fashions, Inc.

72 A.D.2d 731, 443 N.Y.S.2d 6, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13932

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 29, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 72 A.D.2d 731 (Vidal Jeans, Inc. v. Bonjour Paris Fashions, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Vidal Jeans, Inc. v. Bonjour Paris Fashions, Inc., 72 A.D.2d 731, 443 N.Y.S.2d 6, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13932 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on or about January 30, 1979, which denied defendant’s motion to vacate a temporary injunction (granted on default), unanimously reversed, on the law and the [732]*732facts, and in the exercise of discretion, with costs and disbursements to appellant, and defendant’s motion is granted. It has long been recognized that in order to recover plaintiff must establish an exclusive right to the trade-mark by reason of prior appropriation. (Clode v Scribner’s Sons, 200 App Div 532.) It appears from the present record that appellant utilized the mark "Vidal” prior to the date upon which plaintiff (which failed to submit a brief hereon) was incorporated. Concur&emdash;Sullivan, J. P., Bloom, Lane, Lupiano and Ross, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on or about January 30, 1979, which denied defendant’s motion to vacate a temporary injunction (granted on default), unanimously reversed, on the law and the [732]*732facts, and in the exercise of discretion, with costs and disbursements to appellant, and defendant’s motion is granted. It has long been recognized that in order to recover plaintiff must establish an exclusive right to the trade-mark by reason of prior appropriation. (Clode v Scribner’s Sons, 200 App Div 532.) It appears from the present record that appellant utilized the mark "Vidal” prior to the date upon which plaintiff (which failed to submit a brief hereon) was incorporated. Concur&emdash;Sullivan, J. P., Bloom, Lane, Lupiano and Ross, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 A.D.2d 731, 443 N.Y.S.2d 6, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13932, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vidal-jeans-inc-v-bonjour-paris-fashions-inc-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack