General
PONTEFACT et al. v. ISENBERGER
106 F. 499·United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York·1900
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
PONTEFACT et al. v. ISENBERGER.
(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
December 21, 1900.)
Trade-Marks — Injunction.
Where plaintiffs have the sole right to use the trade-mark “Golden Wedding,” as applied to whisky of their production, defendant will be restrained from refilling plaintiffs’ barrels carrying such trade-mark, to palm off his product as that of the pilaintiils.
In Equity.
A. H. Clarke, for plaintiffs.
Rose & I’utzel, for defendant.
[MAJORITY — WHEELER, District Judge.]
WHEELER, District Judge.
This cause has been submitted upon an agreed s tat ('men I: of facts. It shows that the plaintiffs have the sole right to the use of the trade-mark “Golden Wedding,” as applied to the whisky of their production, and that the defendant has refilled the plaintiffs’ barrels carrying the trade-mark, to palm off his product as that of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs are, therefore, entitled to a decree according to the terms of the stipulation. Decree for plaintiffs for $350, according to stipulation.