Home/Idaho Supreme Court/Wm. Walker Co. v. Pocatello Monument Co.

Wm. Walker Co. v. Pocatello Monument Co.

230 P.2d 701, 71 Idaho 294, 1951 Ida. LEXIS 277
CourtIdaho Supreme Court
DecidedApril 25, 1951
Docket7679
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 230 P.2d 701 (Wm. Walker Co. v. Pocatello Monument Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Idaho Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wm. Walker Co. v. Pocatello Monument Co., 230 P.2d 701, 71 Idaho 294, 1951 Ida. LEXIS 277 (Idaho 1951).

Opinion

GIVENS, Chief Justice..

In 1912 William Walker, one of appellants, started a monument business at 135 South 5th Avenue, Pocatello, and in 1926 he incorporated under the name of The Wm. Walker Company. About that time or shortly thereafter, apparently at the suggestion or instigation of the radio station over which appellant was advertising, appellant up until the present time, intermittently and interchangeably, has used in connection with or separately from, the name of Wm. Walker and Wm. Walker Company, the appellation “Pocatello’s Expert Monument Builders” and April 2, 1938, filed with the County Recorder of Bannock County, this certificate of an as *297 sumed or fictitious trade name: Walker Co. a corporation and William Walker, do, each for himself and itself and not one for the other, hereby certify that we are the identical persons who are carrying on, conducting, transacting, or have an interest in, or expect to carry on, conduct, transact or have an interest in the business conducted at 135 S. 5th Ave. in Pocatello City, Bannock County, State of Idaho, under the name and style of Poca-tello’s Expert Monument Builders, which Wm. name or designation is assumed or fictitious and is not the true and real full name or names of all parties or persons having an interest therein, and in compliance with the provisions of Chapter 212, 1921 Session Laws we do hereby certified to the following facts: * *

Appellants advertised under the three designations, sometimes separately and in various combinations and together, variously designating the business thus:

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

Related

Region v. Downtowner of Fort Worth, Inc.
420 S.W.2d 809 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1967)
Shrives v. Talbot
398 P.2d 448 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1965)
Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Co. v. Rivers
398 P.2d 63 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1964)
Nutterville v. McLam
367 P.2d 576 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1961)
Rogers v. Famous Brands of Texas, Inc.
352 S.W.2d 510 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1961)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
230 P.2d 701, 71 Idaho 294, 1951 Ida. LEXIS 277, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wm-walker-co-v-pocatello-monument-co-idaho-1951.